Marxism and Hitlerism: The Denied Parallel Courtesy of Haaretz

After reading an article in Haaretz that attempted to whitewash Karl Marx’s crimes and speculate whether he "might not have been wrong," I sent a sharp critique to one of the writers of Haaretz: Questioning whether Marx was right is like asking whether Nazism was right? The discussion that developed had him claim that Hitler’s true counterpart was Stalin, not Marx. This error demands a fundamental clarification that should be made clear to all.

Hitlerism versus Marxism: Theoretical Parallels

Hitler was a theoretician of racial socialism. Marx was a theoretician of class socialism. The fact that Hitler succeeded in being both a "thinker" and a dictator, unlike Marx, does not negate the fundamental parallel between them as theorists.

Stalin was not an independent thinker but at most an interpreter and implementer of Marxism. Therefore, Hitlerism and Marxism are the true theoretical parallels. Hitlerism and Stalinism are political parallels.

There is no Nazism without Hitlerism, just as there is no Bolshevism without Marxism.

Nazism is the direct maturation of Hitler’s ideological ideas. Leninist-Stalinist communism is the direct maturation of Marx’s philosophy.

Hitler was a political thinker. Marx was a philosopher.

Both proposed totalitarian doctrines.

Both assigned a central role to violent struggle in achieving a vision of salvation.

Marx Tried and Failed

It cannot be claimed that Marx is exempt from responsibility for Communism simply because he did not personally implement his ideas (Stalin). Marx tried. He attempted to lead revolutions through the First International, but failed to turn his ideas into actual power.

Hitler, by contrast, was both a theoretician and a leader. He not only formulated an ideology but also personally led it to practical implementation. Marx’s failure on the practical front does not absolve him of ideological responsibility. On the contrary, it exposes the inherent impossibility of implementing his ideas without descending into catastrophe, as seen in the dozens of places where Marxism was put into practice.

Hegelianism, Total War, and Salvation

Both Marx and Hitler derived their worldviews from Hegelian methodology, viewing history as an inevitable dialectical struggle leading to salvation.

In Marx’s case, the class struggle involved workers against capitalists, culminating in the destruction of the capitalist class and the birth of a new humanity.

In Hitler’s case, the racial struggle involved Aryans against all other races, culminating in the destruction of the so-called inferiors and the rise of the Aryan race.

In both cases, there is no place for coexistence. The necessary conclusion is total war for the salvation of humanity.

Therefore, Marxism and Nazism share a deep common root: the belief in necessary violent struggle to redeem the world. Only the content differs, classes in one and races in the other.

Marxism and Nazism: Consistent Outcome of Destruction

If Marxism were a pure theory whose practitioners corrupted it, one would expect at least a single positive attempt at its implementation. Yet every attempt to apply Marxism, in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and North Korea, has led to the same results: oppression, famine, poverty, and mass murder.

Was Marx himself the only one capable of implementing his theory without destruction? And if so, what kind of theory demands a single perfect executor to function?

It seems Marxists were fortunate that Marx died before he could attempt to realize his ideas and expose their built-in failure. In contrast, Hitler was "bold" enough to lead his ideas to their bitter end.

On the Propaganda That Conceals

The decision to draw a parallel only between Hitler and Stalin, while ignoring the roles of Hitler and Marx as theorists, is not the result of research but of political positioning. The Marxist narrative of the twentieth century vigorously marketed this false separation, arguing that pure Marxist theory does not necessarily lead to murder, unlike Nazi theory.

However, the facts do not support them.

Both Marxism and Nazism inevitably lead to violent struggle. Both Marxism and Nazism are based on the same dynamic of total war for the sake of redemption. Both Marxism and Nazism, in practice, became ideologies of death.

Focusing solely on who fought the wars, Hitler and Stalin, rather than on who laid the ideological foundations that led to those wars, Marx and Hitler, serves the Marxist interest in covering up the roots of violence.

Conclusion

In a true historical perspective, one must recognize:

Hitler and Marx are parallel not only in theoretical analysis but also in their degree of responsibility.

Both laid ideological foundations that led, consistently and directly, to rivers of blood.

Those who refuse to recognize this are not engaged in historical scholarship. They are engaged in political apologetics. Not surprising for Haaretz.