Comments by "Nicholas Conder" (@nicholasconder4703) on "Hitler WASN’T funded into power by the capitalists" video.

  1. One correction to your narrative that I think you should address. William L. Shirer was NOT a historian, he was a journalist. As such, although he was writing his books based on his experiences of the time, they were written without critical review. As such, any historian citing the sources should have checked the veracity of the statements, rather than accept them at face value. In this matter the fault lies more with the historians than Shirer, who probably didn't even look at, or fully understand, the nuances of Nazi economics. I would also point out that things like bank records would likely not have been available to Shirer, and so he would not have been able to confirm whether the transactions had taken place or not. In addition, the biggest issue with defining Nazism as being either capitalist or socialist comes down to the fact that many historians looked at the veneer, and thought "If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it must be a duck". Many post-war historians saw a militaristic dictatorship that had a veneer of capitalism (wealthy bankers and what appeared to be privately owned companies) and ASSUMED that they were looking at a capitalistic system. It is only now, when people are looking for something else to write about regarding the 3rd Reich that historians are actually digging beneath the surface and uncovering the socialist aspects of Nazi Germany. So calling this all a "Socialist plot" is, in my opinion, going a bit too far. I would say this misconception is more the result of lack of access to critical archives and data, and laziness on the part of many post-war historians, who seemed to be willing to quote quotes of quoted material rather than put in the laborious work of going back to original sources and actually doing research!
    3