Marxism is the opiate of the masses

>Marxism is the opiate of the masses

What did she mean by this?

What she said is that Marxism has been used in a similar way than religion.

Marxism was at the time the hope of the working people like religion before it, and this hope or predilection or investment - whatever - was likewise exploited.

Consider that Hitler joins the German Workers Party, increases its popularity and then takes it over from Anton Drexler, a railway man, and consciously taps into this working class base by renaming their party National Socialist.

opiates are good tho

except National Socialism is not Marxist...Hitler in My Struggle and my new Order by Hitler blatantly states that his ideology is the enemy of Democracy and Marxism. (Marxism being the most base form of Socialism and often times used to describe socialism as a whole) Why would the Nazis use an ideology formed by Karl Marx a Jew? I would also Suggest reading The Naz Soci By Goebbels as well. Socialism refers to Social as in Society. The Social Order of Germanic peoples. By that logic the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is super democratic!

Socialism predated Marx. National Socialism was marketed as, well, a nationalistic socialism, rather than an international, Marxist one. Goebbels himself, for instance, allegedly wrote in his diary that, were he to have to choose, he would prefer the victory of Bolshevism over capitalism. Note Goebbels book in your pic, "Nazi-Sozi". Sozi was the German slang term for a Socialist.
I find it strange you make the comparison to the DPRK since you imply they're use of the word democratic is dishonest - don't you tarnish Nazism with the same brush? I'm assuming you're sympathetic.

It annoys me how much I find myself agreeing with or liking when I read about the Nazis ideals and perspectives. Not because of some liberal democratic moralism. I dunno. It's like the temptation of the snake in the garden or something. I really think Nazism is a failed, destructive force with too many flaws to admire close-up. I think I would be very sourly disillusioned if I supported it. To quote the topic of thread, several times:
>Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvelous, intoxicating
and
>All things carefully considered, I believe they come down to this: what scares me is the Church as a social thing. Not solely because of her stains, but by the very fact that it is, among other characteristics, a social thing. Not that I am by temperament very individualistic. I fear for the opposite reason. I have in myself a strongly gregarious spirit. I am by natural disposition extremely easily influenced in excess, and especially by collective things. I know that if in this moment I had before me twenty German youth singing Nazi songs in chorus, part of my soul would immediately become Nazi. It is a very great weakness of mine. . . . I am afraid of the patriotism of the Church that exists in the Catholic culture. I mean ‘patriotism’ in the sense of sentiment analogous to an earthly homeland. I am afraid because I fear contracting its contagion. Not that the Church appears unworthy of inspiring such sentiment, but because I don’t want any sentiment of this kind for myself. The word ‘want’ is not accurate. I know— I sense with certainty— that such sentiment of this type, whatever its object might be, would be disastrous in me. Some saints approved the Crusades and the Inquisition. I cannot help but think they were wrong. I cannot withdraw from the light of conscience. If I think I see more clearly than they do on this point— I who am so far below them— I must allow that on this point they must have been blinded by something very powerful. That something is the Church as a social thing. If this social thing did such evil to them, what evil might it not also do to me, one who is particularly vulnerable to social influences, and who is infinitely feebler than they?

That's stupid. Marxism has always been more popular with bourgeois academics than the masses

It was big with the working classes during interwar period, depression etc.

Spectacular.

She was a dumbass ethical egoist who believed in a false dichotomy.

So has capitalism and money/material goods