So what? What does this have to do with anything? Socialist societies repress and severely punish virtually everything present in the constitution and the Bill of Rights that we take as standard human freedoms and rights. Tell us about all the jazz, big band swing, and rock n' roll one could avail oneself of In Soviet Russia or the Warsaw Pact states from the 30s onward, Molok? Tell us about all the movies, novels, and plays one could freely see? Shall we discuss the ultra-puritanical sexual morality featured in the official ideology of Mao's China?I thought we were talking about conservatives in Germany? You do realize that wouldn't be the same thing as a conservative in the United States? No, probably not.
Someone was, but without any apparent comprehension or understanding of what the term "conservative" means in either context.
Their propagandistic use of ancient Germanic myth, symbol, and legend in their overall ideological program does not indicate they were trying to return to a mythic German past. They used that past to fire emotional and psychological passion (as Mao Tse Tung finally figured out, after attempting to utterly obliterate traditional Chines culture) but they were not trying to "return" to anything, but forge a new totalist social order like none seen before (as were the socialists in Russia).Oh, ok. Just because they said they were going to return Germany to its former glory, and tried to do it, and adopted all the old symbols and so forth, that doesn't mean they weren't, because Droopy says so.
Germany had no former glory, as until 1871 it had never existed as a coherent nation state having a clear, unified history as a clearly defined national entity. Secondly, the destruction of virtually all of the core features of traditional German society as it then existed, including Christianity, the family as a private institution intermediately between the individual and the state, virtually all traditional morality, and the idea of the volk as an organic unitary collective bound by a collective common purpose expressed as a common will by an absolute state and cultic leader embodying the "common will" of an entire people is hardly "conservative" in any realistic sense of that term. In a mid to late 20th century context, its utterly fantastic.
What you're describing above is the well known phenomena of people who are the most viscerally anti homosexual having homosexual tendencies.
This is not a "well known phenomena" but a traditional leftist trope and debate circumvention mechanism used to poison the well and morally assassinate political opponents. Its a well-worn and threadbare manifestation of politically correct language thuggery, deployed much as the politicized concepts of racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, heterosexism etc. are used as clubs to beat down arguments the Left can not win on intellectual grounds.
Its closest analog is actually probably not the above, but the old Leninist idea of "false consciousness," so well utilized in the past in both radical feminism and critical race theory.
You clearly don't understand the concept "conservative" in either a historic or modern 20th century sense, and from within this dense fog of educational ignorance, serious discourse is exceptionally difficult.Oh, if only you knew where I was educated.
Here's a hint: it's an institution of such ultra conservative stripes that looking at their class titles alone would make you salivate. I would agree with you that they taught a lot of ignorance there, though.
If you think modern, post 50s conservatives are relevant to "conservatives" of 19th or 18th century Germany, the question of "education is moot.
