Who voted for the National Socialists

1928 1933

Communist 77 14.6% 81 15.3%
Social Democrat 143 27.1% 120 22.7%
Democratic 20 3.8% 5 0.9%
Center 68 12.9% 74 14.0%
Bavarian Volk 19 3.6% 18 3.4%
Economic 23 4.4% 0 0.0%
German Volk 30 5.7% 2 0.4%
Nationalists 41 7.8% 52 9.8%
Nazi 107 20.3% 288 54.5%

What’s interesting here is that while your average college professor will insist that the Nazi’s were right-wing extremists, drawing support from the more conservative elements of German society, he doesn’t usually know that the National Socialist party drew inordinate support from women and he almost surely doesn’t know what the actual vote totals from the last elections in the Weimar Republic were.

Carroll Quigley’s judgment on ideologies is suspect, given that he wrongly places the National Socialists on the extreme right, but I have listed the vote totals from the 1928 and 1933 elections as per his ideological classifications to demonstrate something interesting. (There were also elections in 1930 and two in 1932, but including them only serves to underline the point while making it somewhat complicated for a blog post.)

But if the electorate was moving to the right, why then would two of the three parties of the left, the Democrats and Social Democrats, lose almost eight percent to the National Socialists while the left-most party increased slightly? Especially when the second-rightmost party gained, as did the Center.

The picture makes more sense if one considers the National Socialists in their rightful place, a party of the hard Left with nationalist appeal. The other parties that prospered – the Communists and the Nationalists – showed that the German voters were increasingly supportive of A) hard left ideology, and, B) German nationalism.

Thus, it seems more reasonable to conclude that the SPD, the KPD and the NASDAP parties were all left-wing parties competing for a left-leaning electorate and it was the addition of nationalism to its socialism, combined with their advantage of economic credibility over the Communists, that gave the Nazis their popular appeal

I’m the one and only Roombanator

And James Brown is dead…. Yes, my office is massively clean now, with a floor off which you could eat assuming you want to try to wrestle the Ridgeback. Did I mention that I like our new robot? She’s a little tired now after doing her happy dance, but I have a feeling that she’ll be acquiring some new friends soon.

I’m not saying that I’ve been evangelizing The Word According to Roomba around here or anything, but I am thinking about buying ten minutes on Sunday morning on one of the satellite channels.

Ya got’ta charge up!

By the way, has anyone noticed that the chirping “think I’m gonna dance now” melody when she gets started sounds more than a little bit like the theme from Intellivision NFL Football? Actually, it’s not really all that similar, but it’s close enough to make me think that some fake crowd cheers would be awesome. Also, strobing neon lights would be cool in the dark.

Between Roomba and Ron Mexico, I have to say, I’m having a pretty good week.

Happy Lenin Day!

Today, of course, is the day we honor the birthday of that great man, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. While I have not yet realized my long-cherished dream of urinating on his corpse, I like to remember him on this, that most Soviet of days.

Oh, are we calling it Earth Day now? Well, piss on that too. One moment…. In fact, I just did.

Nick Coleman, hermaphrodite-at-large

Star & Sickle columnist Nick Coleman unwisely elects to write to PressThink:

Do you THINK the press is being de-certified? Which side are you on? I thought that was your game plan. You ripped me last fall without even speaking to me because I had the poor judgment (or maybe the balls) to confront right wing wingnut bloggers who have my newspaper (and most others) in the crosshairs of a constant all-out partisan attack. And they are winning, prof. The Star-Tribune now has hired a by-god certifiable right wing activist and power megaphone. Funny, I haven’t seen you make any mention of that yet. Nor do I remember you defending me in December when I criticized the dudes at Powerline, who I called extremists while most of the academic press fakers of the world were bending over to kiss their jodhpurs. By the way, in case you haven’t paid attention, many other journalists have since come to the same conclusion. I could cite chapte and verse, but why bother.

Nick Coleman is a being of scientific wonder. He’s both a prick and a pussy! As one PressThink commenter noted, where are those two anti-blog screeds? They seem to have mysteriously disappeared from his archive at the Red Star…. And of course, he’s a legacy media dinosaur, too slow to realize that in the blogosphere, what you write will be read, noted and commented upon regardless of whether it is an email, a blog post or a column. Didn’t you get the government memo? There is no privacy anymore.

I realize it’s hard for the legacy media types to get over the assumption that everything they write will vanish to the winds and be forgotten three days later, (and where are all those gunfights on Washington Avenue that the concealed-carry law was certain to bring about?) but some people just have to learn the hard way.

Nicki, my dear angry little chickadee, the reason Mr. Rosen wasn’t defending you is because, unlike you, he’s not dumb enough to think your position is a defensible one.

Mailvox: what are the implications?

MM doesn’t want Big Brother’s protective fist:

I read your article, “Stay single, young man!”. I have only been introduced to the Libertarian mindset within the past two years and I must say, I agree with much of it. I am very curious as to what the legal (or any other) implications, or possible repercussions, are if I were to take the “unlegalized” (for lack of a better term) marriage route. It is my firm belief that government has no place in marriage, and I do not welcome its interference into mine. I would really appreciate any information you could send my way and also your own wisdom concerning the matter at hand. I am a young lady who wants the most God-honoring marriage possible, and this is one area I’ve been pondering about for quite some time. Thanks for addressing it!!

I’m no lawyer and I’m not in the mood to consider legalities for fun today – had enough of that over the last few days in my real job – so if anyone is up for playing out this scenario, have at it.

The Bear roars

Most financial commentators are excited about yesterday’s sizable rally in the equity markets, thinking it a sign that the Bull has returned. Of course, since most financial commentators are credulous fools with no sense of history, they are completely wrong.

It may be counterintuitive, but sharp, powerful rallies are actually a very bad sign for the stock market. Consider that since May 1, 2002, there have been 30 days wherein the Dow closed at a 2 percent gain or more, including yesterday. 12 of those big rally days occurred in the 113 trading days from May 1 to October 10, 2002, when the Dow went from 10,059.63 to 7,181.87, losing almost a third of its value, a big rally ratio of 10.62 percent.

Of the other 18 that occurred in almost three years of post-October recovery, five occurred within the first eight days of the intermediate-term October 10 low, with six more in the next three months. These 18 big rally days have been amassed in 637 trading days, for a big rally ratio of 2.83 percent.

Furthermore, the average big rally when the trend is down is 3.6 percent, whereas the up-trand big rally averages only 2.29 percent if one excludes the first two days of the rebound. Therefore, unless yesterday’s performance is followed and surpassed by larger rallies over the next week, one must conclude that yesterday’s big day is a powerful confirmation that the bear market has resumed and it is time to exit your long positions.

In summary, big rally days cannot be considered indicative of bull markets or intermediate-term recoveries, except at the immediate beginning when they occur in rapid progression.