Talk:Beefsteak Nazi

German for "Beefsteak Nazi"?

Does anyone know the German expression for 'beefsteak Nazi'? I haven't been able to find it. Thanks. D.S. Cordoba-Bahle (talk) 01:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it was "Beefsteak-Nazi" in German as well (with a hyphen). The word "Beefsteak" was already known to Germans, as seen in recipes for "Beefsteak" published in a 1845 German cookbook (see German Wiki on "Beefsteak"). The expression "Beefsteak-Nazi" was described in Heinz Küpper's six-volume glossary of German slang, see https://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-46407774.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.132.225.234 (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems very unlikely that 1. the National Socialists called themselves "Nazis", and 2. put the three-syllable word "Rindersteak" in front. What I found out in a seminar paper from 2000 merely states: "The vernacular compared SA to a beefsteak: brown on the outside and red on the inside." https://www.grin.com/document/104436

Interesting with regard to the "Brown Shirts" (who supposedly imitated Mussolini's Black Shirts) the following insight https://www.welt.de/geschichte/article192289913/Braunhemden-Fuer-die-SA-Leute-waren-die-SS-Mitglieder-Verraeter.html:

Professor Siemens, allegedly the SA got hold of their brown shirts by chance - it was supposedly a leftover item from stocks of the former German colonial troops.

Daniel Siemens: That's true. In the beginning, money was tight at the SA, so the party was happy to grab it when the brown material could be purchased cheaply. However, it should be added that the first SA men did not wear brown shirts at all, but windbreakers. They could only be recognized by their red armbands with swastikas. The party was not able to implement the uniform outfit until 1926, but even in the 1930s there were still men who made their own brown shirts, often for cost reasons. In the meantime, the NSDAP had centralized the merchandising and sale of "real" brown shirts. One has to imagine the whole thing in a similar way as today with the jerseys of the big soccer clubs. The shirts were produced cheaply and in mass and then sold to the supporters for comparatively expensive money. For the SA, this was an important source of income at the time.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:8109:b00:4776:61fa:88db:d0b5:f3dc (talk) 4:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

"Sozis" was a colloquial nickname for Social Democrats, and was the templ;ate upon which "Nazi" was coined. I see no reason that a disparaging nickname for johnny-come-lately National Socialists used by long-term National Socialists wouldn't use "Nazi". In other words, they might not have liked being called "Nazis" themselves (although I don't think that's been established - and, remember, there was a lot less stigma then to the word than there is now), but they might have been willing to use it to demean these newcomers, some of whom came from the SPD and KPD. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:15, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds plausible, but remains speculation. What speaks against it is the propagated comradeship spirit, which had to counteract any divisive tendency. Whereby the uniform was obviously more important than the original political background.

It is true that "Nazism" was characterized by internal rivalry ("polycracy") and not a "monolithic bloc," as is claimed today (for ideological reasons, in order to establish an unassailable image of the enemy).

The reality, however, was much more diverse. Austrian communist Hermann Langbein said at the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial that all possible shades of character existed among the SS camp personnel, from compassionate protectors to sadistic tormentors.

After the war, the communist SED recruited former Nazis in the Russian occupied zone (GDR) with the following appeal:

The SED calls you to help in the reconstruction of Germany!

It calls you if you once joined the NSDAP not for material-egoistic reasons, but out of conviction and idealism. If you went there believing to find the good, the socialism. Then come to us! Because what Hitler promised you and never kept, the SED will give you:

Nationalization of the banks. Breaking the bondage of interest. Destruction of the corporations and trusts. Abolition of the privilege of education. Equal rights for all creative people. Land reform. Protection of peaceful development and peace in general.

The SED made it happen!

If you followed Hitler to serve Germany, you are our man. Because the SED is the only party that consistently stands up for a unified and great Germany, for a Germany of peace and work.

If you want to help build such a Germany, then vote for List 1!

https://sciencefiles.org/2020/02/09/als-die-sed-um-nazis-geworben-hat-merkels-afd-apartheid/?fbclid=IwAR3_SIAbVjDbRlaMcXKoT7Ju0N3FxQigAZpqpKPTHnknXscHBwxgBPNxQyA#jp-carousel-87334 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B00:4776:31CD:654:B117:A384 (talk) 05:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with the expression "irrelevant non sequiturs"? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the point you're making, but you are using needlessly inflammatory rhetoric. — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like he didn't like my answer (and/or can't think of anything to say about it - except "inflammatory rhetoric"). His problem (not mine). After all, he has invited me (now already for the repeated time) to the "debate" - not vice versa. I only added the info with the SED because it is probably relatively unknown in the English-speaking world and is also still quite current (had read it only yesterday). That seemed (at least for me) to fit thematically without further ado. What is supposed to be "wrongly concluded" about my remarks or the translation, the inflammatory "rhetorician" provides no indication. It is, after all, unfortunately the case that the definition of what "Nazism" allegedly was, is primarily established by non-Germans.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B00:4776:31CD:654:B117:A384 (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "debate" when one side says "Perhaps this happened..." and the other side says "Asparagus is green," it's a farce, and a folly to continue to participate in, which I will no longer. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]