Comments by "OscarTang" (@oscartang4587u3) on "Hitler WASN’T funded into power by the capitalists" video.

  1. Lenin was also supported by the Imperial German monarchy and capitalists like Armand Hammer and Alexander Parvus. Being backed by big companies and hating capitalism are not mutually excluded.
    6
  2. Lenin and Stalin also eliminated the Mensheviks, the anarchists, the syndicalists, the Trotskyists, and the Kronstadt rebellion. Millions more leftists Stalin and Mao disagreed with were also eliminated in the respective political movement. If eliminating different leftist groups would disqualify anyone as a socialist and their ideologies from Socialisms. Lenin, Stalin and Mao and their respective Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism, should also not be socialistic.
    5
  3. ⁠ @SkeeterHowitzer Those happened after 1/1933, Hitler became the chancellor of Germany, aka Rise of Hitler.
    5
  4. Hitler became chancellor/ get into power in January 1933. TIK addressed that meeting here. 9:41
    4
  5.  @lebenstraum666  Because Capitalists in Germany didn't get all purged like those in USSR, and Socialism doesn't require the purging of Capitalists. There is a whole spectrum of Socialism named market Socialism that permits and the existence of and just regulates Capitalists and free market.
    4
  6. Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.), That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224) For the others two, their Executive members were either joining the Nazi Party, or replaced by Nazi members. Those who disloyal or refused to joined the Party were getting their company redistributed to other Nazi members. Notable examples as follow: Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party
    4
  7. The accusations here is Hitler was funded by Big Business to the power. Beside, every Communist Party or Left wing party at start were also fund by many workers and proletariat, with your logic do you mean that they are all fund by Capitalists?
    4
  8. Firstly, Nazi Germany paid for those [schipping]. Ford didn't “support” those [schipping] unconditionally. Those “Supports” that you claimed were just international trading. Secondly, not only did Foreign Capitalist supplied resources to Nazi, Soviet Union supplied Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, would it also make Hitler a Communist because the USSR also supported him? How about those Soviet communists? They were also “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. The other case would be Cuba. It is currently actively seeking investment from foreign capitalist companies. Does it make them not practising Socialism?
    4
  9. May I ask can you provide your source to support your claims?
    4
  10. I have no clue, but here is that underground channel. It is Donald Trump. He funded Hitler with dogecoins from the future with a Time Machine hidden in Epstein Island, which is fueled by the blood of 10000 alien lizard men.
    3
  11. Hitler became chancellor/ get into power in January 1933. TIK addressed that meeting here. 9:41
    3
  12. The evidence showing western capitalists were not instrumental in Hitler rise to power in this video is sufficient enough. No need for further elaboration. For the second part, if western capitalists were instrumental in Hitler’s continued power, why would Western capitalists State joined forces with the Eastern Communist State to defeat Hitler in WWII.
    3
  13. From TIK's another video-- "Hitler's Socialism: The Evidence is Overwhelming" As numerous historians have pointed out, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party was a grassroots organisation that financed itself from donations and selling tickets to Hitler’s speeches. Here is Richard Evans confirming this. (Evans, “The Coming of the Third Reich,” Kindle Chapter 3: “The Roots of Commitment”. Jeffreys, “Hell’s Cartel,” Kindle Chapter 6. Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p347, p352-353.) “The Nazi Party depended on such commitment [finance from the grassroots]; much of its power and dynamism came from the fact that it was not dependent on big business or bureaucratic institutions such as trade unions for its financial support, as the ‘bourgeois’ parties and the Social Democrats to varying degrees were, still less on the secret subsidies of a foreign power, along the lines of the Moscow-financed Communists.” (Evans, “The Coming of the Third Reich,” Kindle Chapter 3: “The Roots of Commitment”.) “The notion that Germany’s capitalists contributed significantly to Hitler’s rise has become something of a truism. More often than not, that is the message conveyed by American textbooks for students of European history and by other instructional works. With astonishing frequency, in short, evidence and purported evidence bearing on the subject of this book has been dealt with by historians in a fashion marked by a striking suspension of professional standards.” (Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p350.)
    3
  14. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    3
  15. Albert Pietzch seems you altered the origin quote. "Pietzsch has been an adviser of Hitler since 1925, and is [[[alleged to be]]] one of the men who financed Hitler in the early days of the Nazi Party." ("Elimination of German Resources for War”, Senate Committee on Military Affairs, 1945.) PS: alleged: said or thought by some people to be the stated bad or illegal thing, although you have no proof: (Cambridge Dictionary) Hermann Schmitz--"Hermann Schmitz became an early supporter of Hitler, with whom he collaborated in making IG Farben a vast spying organization under a commercial cloak." The whole quote didn't show that Hermann Schmitz funded Hitler, not to mention funding Hitler before January 1933. Dr Max Ilgner—["Dr Max Ilgner, the foreign minister of IG Farben, ... who not only financed the rise of Hitler but sought to weld the interests of IG Farben and Nazism into an instrument of world power.”]
 Right in the next paragraph it said:
"Soon after the accession of Hitler to power, it was realized that Nazism would offer excellent potentialities for expending the interest of IG Farben, both in Germany and throughout the world.”” ("Elimination of German Resources for War”, Senate Committee on Military Affairs, 1945.)

It seems Dr Max Ilgner financed the rise of Hitler after the accession of Hitler to power, which at least happened after Hitler became canceller in January 1933
    3
  16.  @Dumpsteret1  Firstly, secret meetings in 4/1/1933 is not funding, which is the main point of this video. Beside directly from your second source, banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder stated that “I took no part in them.” to the “Meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house of the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder in Cologne”. Secondly, those foreign companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    3
  17. ⁠ @Dumpsteret1  “Meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house of the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder in Cologne” is the only evidence you used to try to prove Hitler was funded by Capitalists into power. Again, the secret meeting on 4/1/1933 was just a meeting and didn’t involve any funding to Hitler, which is the main point of this video. Besides, directly from your second source, banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder stated that “I took no part in them.” in the “Meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house of the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder in Cologne”. Which aspect of that meeting can make you conclude that the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder or any other capitalists funded Hitler into power? [No, but Many] Nearly all Communist states traded with Capitalist States or Capitalist companies, maybe except Albania or Cambodia. For the foreign capitalists, you haven’t provided any source that indicated there was any having any financial transaction with the Nazi party prior to 1/1933. Ford, GM and others all came after Hitler rose to power. [You obviously don't understand the circumstances that forced Stalin to ally with his arch enemy Hitler.] Many, including securing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, made Nazi Germany turn a blind eye to the USSR's westward expansion to Baltic States, Finland and Hungry. [AFTER 1939, again nothing to do with the claim made in this post, or my responses.] "Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent." happened in 1935 and 1937. Besides, what did [AFTER 1939] mean to the Soviet Union? It was still a Communist state practising Marxist Leninism. [One having zero to do with the BS claim that Capitalists didn't fund Hitler into power, ] You still weren't able to provide any substance evidence to support this argument, as just because Schröder had many connections with the US capital before 31/1/1933, Schröder arranged a meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house before 31/1/1933, and Schröder was involved in many international money/resources funnelling to Nazi Germany after Hitler got into power. It doesn't mean that Schröder or any other capitalists funded Hitler into power.
    3
  18.  @Dumpsteret1 How is it possible? This is not my channel. Are you try to mention the J word?
    3
  19. ⁠ @Dumpsteret1 I have replied your second reply already
    3
  20. ⁠ @Dumpsteret1 You have posted your second reply three times already. I don’t know why you can’t see it.
    3
  21.  @Dumpsteret1  Yes I replied that reply already.
    3
  22.  @Dumpsteret1 ​⁠​⁠ “Meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house of the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder in Cologne” is the only evidence you used to try to prove Hitler was funded by Capitalists into power. Again, the secret meeting on 4/1/1933 was just a meeting and didn’t involve any funding to Hitler, which is the main point of this video. Besides, directly from your second source, banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder stated that “I took no part in them.” in the “Meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house of the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder in Cologne”. Which aspect of that meeting can make you conclude that the banker Kurt Freiherr von Schröder or any other capitalists funded Hitler into power? [No, but Many] Nearly all Communist states traded with Capitalist States or Capitalist companies, maybe except Albania or Cambodia. For the foreign capitalists, you haven’t provided any source that indicated there was any having any financial transaction with the Nazi party prior to 1/1933. Ford, GM and others all came after Hitler rose to power. [You obviously don't understand the circumstances that forced Stalin to ally with his arch enemy Hitler.] Many, including securing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, made Nazi Germany turn a blind eye to the USSR's westward expansion to Baltic States, Finland and Hungry. [AFTER 1939, again nothing to do with the claim made in this post, or my responses.] "Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent." happened in 1935 and 1937. Besides, what did [AFTER 1939] mean to the Soviet Union? It was still a Communist state practising Marxist Leninism. [One having zero to do with the BS claim that Capitalists didn't fund Hitler into power, ] You still weren't able to provide any substance evidence to support this argument, as just because Schröder had many connections with the US capital before 31/1/1933, Schröder arranged a meeting between Hitler and von Papen in the house before 31/1/1933, and Schröder was involved in many international money/resources funnelling to Nazi Germany after Hitler got into power. It doesn't mean that Schröder or any other capitalists funded Hitler into power.
    3
  23. Your narrative seems contradicted with historical facts. Capitalists didn’t support Hitler to become the Chancellor. In November 1932, 19 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture wrote a petition to Hindenburg demanding Hitler be made chancellor. In the same November 1932, there were 339 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture signed election manifesto “With Hindenburg for the People and the Reich”. The call supported the Papen cabinet and turned against the NSDAP. (Henry Ashby Turner : The big entrepreneurs and the rise of Hitler)
    3
  24.  @XavierY828  Krupps -> Nazi member, Government Officials Opel -> Nazi member Vögler ->Government Officials
    3
  25. However, in Mein Kampf Hitler stated he wanted to end class inequality, he claimed that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf: "(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such. To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks. ..... A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf)
    3
  26. Historically Nazi, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade Union——Nationalisation. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF, like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions. “Today we can no longer confine ourselves to proclaiming the dictatorship of the proletariat. The trade unions have to be governmentalised; they have to be fused with state bodies. The work of building up large-scale industry has to be entrusted entirely to them. But all that is not enough. “(V. I. Lenin Report at the Second All-Russia Trade Union Congress January 20, 1919) Use the CTC of Cuba as an example. Non of them have right to strike and collective bargaining. (Por Pedro Pablo Morejon, There Aren’t Any Real Unions in Cuba) “There was no change in Cuba where the single trade union system persists, there is no genuine collective bargaining and the right to strike is not recognised in law. “ (2007 Annual Survey of violations of trade union rights - Cuba) _______________ Historical fact also indicated that DAF in real live was also not pro-capitalist as the Nazi in your own imagination. Employers were also people being regulated by the DAF. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112)
    2
  27. ⁠ @jorgenhelsing9772 I am not a fan of Europecentric narrative, again may I ask what are you trying to imply with that fact that the ASEA logo had a Swastika
    2
  28. Freundeskreis der Wirtschaft didn't fund Hitler before 1/1933, when Hitler became the chancellor of Germany, aka Rise of Hitler.
    2
  29. Those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as a Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist because not only did Foreign Capitalist “support” Nazis, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German and Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic, USSR’s communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalism.
    2
  30.  @tpxchallenger  Saying There was a deal of mutual benefit between German capital and the NSDAP in 1932 is utterly false. And the Freundeskreis der Wirtschaft was just a minority portion of German capital in 1932. In November 1932, 19 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture wrote a petition to Hindenburg demanding Hitler be made chancellor? Firstly, petition was not fund. Secondly, in the same November 1932, there were 339 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture signed election manifesto “With Hindenburg for the People and the Reich”. The call supported the Papen cabinet and turned against the NSDAP. (Henry Ashby Turner : The big entrepreneurs and the rise of Hitler)
    2
  31.  @tpxchallenger  10:56 February 1933 after Hitler became chancellor in January 1933. Those money were funded to the state already. Regarding Nationalised Trade Union: Historically Nazi, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade Union——Nationalisation. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF, like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions. “Today we can no longer confine ourselves to proclaiming the dictatorship of the proletariat. The trade unions have to be governmentalised; they have to be fused with state bodies. The work of building up large-scale industry has to be entrusted entirely to them. But all that is not enough. “(V. I. Lenin Report at the Second All-Russia Trade Union Congress January 20, 1919) Use the CTC of Cuba as an example. Non of them have right to strike and collective bargaining. (Por Pedro Pablo Morejon, There Aren’t Any Real Unions in Cuba) “There was no change in Cuba where the single trade union system persists, there is no genuine collective bargaining and the right to strike is not recognised in law. “ (2007 Annual Survey of violations of trade union rights - Cuba) Historical fact also indicated that DAF in real life was also not pro-capitalist as the Nazi in your own imagination. The "capitalists" were also being regulated by the DAF. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112)
    2
  32.  @tpxchallenger  Do you know that Engels was a Capitalist and Lenin was supported by German Monarchy? Who supported Hitler would not refute the narrative that Hitler was a Socialist at all, otherwise you also need to refute Karl Marx and Lenin from being Socialists. This video is just focused on the point that “Hitler WASN’T funded into power by the capitalists”. Being supported by a few Capitalists vocally or financial really doesn't mean anything at all.
    2
  33.  @tpxchallenger  But Engels funded Marx daily lives. And what understanding are you talking about? From TIK's another video-- "Hitler's Socialism: The Evidence is Overwhelming" As numerous historians have pointed out, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party was a grassroots organisation that financed itself from donations and selling tickets to Hitler’s speeches. Here is Richard Evans confirming this. (Evans, “The Coming of the Third Reich,” Kindle Chapter 3: “The Roots of Commitment”. Jeffreys, “Hell’s Cartel,” Kindle Chapter 6. Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p347, p352-353.) “The Nazi Party depended on such commitment [finance from the grassroots]; much of its power and dynamism came from the fact that it was not dependent on big business or bureaucratic institutions such as trade unions for its financial support, as the ‘bourgeois’ parties and the Social Democrats to varying degrees were, still less on the secret subsidies of a foreign power, along the lines of the Moscow-financed Communists.” (Evans, “The Coming of the Third Reich,” Kindle Chapter 3: “The Roots of Commitment”.) “The notion that Germany’s capitalists contributed significantly to Hitler’s rise has become something of a truism. More often than not, that is the message conveyed by American textbooks for students of European history and by other instructional works. With astonishing frequency, in short, evidence and purported evidence bearing on the subject of this book has been dealt with by historians in a fashion marked by a striking suspension of professional standards.” (Turner, “German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” p350.)
    2
  34.  @tpxchallenger Again what understanding in 1932? in the same November 1932, there were 339 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture signed election manifesto “With Hindenburg for the People and the Reich”. The call supported the Papen cabinet and turned against the NSDAP. (Henry Ashby Turner : The big entrepreneurs and the rise of Hitler)
    2
  35.  @tpxchallenger What no expropriation? Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party. And What no nationalisation? The Reichsbahn - the German railways - and the Reichsbank - the German Bank - officially nationalized in 1937 under the Act of “Gesetz zur Neuregelung der Verhältnisse der Reichsbank und der Deutschen Reichsbahn. The corporate law in 1937 that removed the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938) 2. Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.), That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224)
    2
  36. ⁠​⁠ @tpxchallenger It sounded like Marx was protecting Hegels’ family capitalism from the class struggles and worker revolution that his Marxism advocated.
    2
  37.  @tpxchallenger  Hitler can expropriated their property like the communist did and which he also did in the future. Privatisation of State own property through selling stocks which they also did and that renationalised the control entitled by every stock via the cooperate law of 1937. Nazi scammed money from the private sector though tons of ways. Party-controlled fixed wages (Aly, "Hitler's Beneficiaries," Chapter 2.), national investment policy like Geräuschlose Kriegsfinanzierung (forcing banks to "invest" war bonds with the customer saving) and Eisernes Sparen ( Provident fund but for the war effort, involuntary if you were Civil servants, state employees, employees of the NSDAP and their organisations), plus scams against citizen like "Strength Through Joy Car" (Beetle Car) and "Privatisation", citizens had already been unknowingly "taxed" even before they get their wage.
    2
  38. ⁠​⁠​⁠ @tpxchallenger what no more anti capitalist wing within NSDAP since July, 1934. You are just repeating your narrative without providing any supporting evidence Nazi did oppress the capitalists. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112) ​​⁠Firms did get expropriated Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party. Means of production and Capital did get Nationalised The Reichsbahn - the German railways - and the Reichsbank - the German Bank - officially nationalized in 1937 under the Act of “Gesetz zur Neuregelung der Verhältnisse der Reichsbank und der Deutschen Reichsbahn. The corporate law in 1937 that removed the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938) Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.), That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224)
    2
  39.  @tpxchallenger Again, there was expropriation, and their business arrangements were altered. Nazis did altered the business arrangements of the capitalists. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112) ​​⁠Firms did get expropriated Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party.
    2
  40.  @michaelmoser4537  Getting into the government through election(not totally) and expanding it into dictatorial powers as the cabinet of the is two different things. You are not talking about turning a blind eye, acknowledging, supporting or even collaborating. You are talking about funding Hitler into power. What was needed to be funded for the Reichstag fire and the Enabling Act? A match and a can of gasoline? Every funding after the Nazis got into the government through the election (not totally) is irrelevant for Hitler to get into power because Hitler had already got into power by winning the election, the most cost-intensive procedure, already.
    2
  41.  @ammass321 He was cancelled after Hitler won the last un-rigged election, how can any of those old-elite Money fund Hilter into power?
    2
  42. TIK did not cite the quote from "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer at 5:40. A YouTube user cited that quote and tried to use it to debunk a statement TIK never made.
    2
  43. First Lenin came for Anarchist in 4/1918. Then Lenin came for the Socialist Revolutionary in 7/1918. Then Lenin came for kulak( peasants who owned over 8 acres of land) in 8/1918. Then Lenin came for the striking and rioting industrial workers in 3/1919. For the Priests, monks and nuns? 3,000 of them were put to death in 1918 alone.
    2
  44. In Mein Kampf Hitler stated he want to end class inequality, he claimed that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf: "(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such. To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks. ..... A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf)
    2
  45. Nazi Germany paid for those supply. Those “foreign capitalist” didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If this logic worked: 1. Lenin would be a Monarchist, as it was the German Empire that helped him get back to Russia during WWI. 2. Nazis would also be Communist because Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). 3. Soviet Communist would be Fascist as Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped USSR to build the destroyer Tashkent.
    2
  46. Saying Hitler have no Economical ideology is blatantly false. In Mein Kampf, he did illustrate how he envisioned the economy system of his Germany. “In place of this struggle, the National Socialist State will take over the task of caring for and defending the rights of all parties concerned. It will be the duty of the Economic Chamber itself to keep the national economic system in smooth working order and to remove whatever defects or errors it may suffer from. Questions that are now fought over through a quarrel that involves millions of people will then be settled in the Representative Chambers of Trades and Professions and in the Central Economic Parliament. Thus employers and employees will no longer find themselves drawn into a mutual conflict over wages and hours of work, always to the detriment of their mutual interests. But they will solve these problems together on a higher plane, where the welfare of the national community and of the State will be as a shining ideal to throw light on all their negotiations.” (Mein Kampf 1939 English version ) In Mein Kampf Hitler also claimed he wanted to end class inequality too, he claimed that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf: "(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such. To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks. ..... A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf 1939 English version)
    2
  47.  @xatsmann ​​⁠ ​​⁠​What contradicting mess are you talking about, can you provide any examples to support your argument. The two Hitler economic policies I quoted from Mein Kampf was actively put into practice, there is no contradiction between theory and practice between those economic policies. Hitler did (at least tried to) reduce the inequality between the rich and poor and let the state to take over the task of caring for and defending the rights of all parties (employers and employees) concerned. Nazi Germany gradually reduce unemployment, the taxes were levied against the rich, the corporations, and foreigners like the Jews. They weren’t levied against the poor, who had their food, rend, clothing, and recreational activities (plus others) subsidized by the State. ( Aly, “Hitler’s Beneficiaries,” see Chapter 2.) “Family and child tax credits, marriage loans, and home-furnishing and child-education allowances were among the measures with which the state tried to relieve the financial burden on parents and encourage Germans to have more children.” (Aly, “Hitler’s Beneficiaries,” p38-39.) In addition to this, there were price controls, wage controls, rent controls, and centralised distribution of goods - materials could only be bought with certificates which had to be obtained from one of the various central planning boards which distributed said materials.( Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p51-52, p67-70, p251-254.) Historical fact also indicated that DAF in real live was also not pro-capitalist as the Nazi in your own imagination. The "capitalists" were also people being regulated by the DAF. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112)
    2
  48. Baron Von Schnitzler———IG Farben Board didn’t have this person, this name was not even in the Defendants list of the IG Farben Trail. It might refer to Georg von Schnitzler. The earliest record of him actually contributing to the Nazi Party was to Goering with RM 1,000,000 in 1934 ("Elimination of German Resources for War”, Senate Committee on Military Affairs, 1945.) , after Hitler became canceller in January 1933.
    2
  49. Lenin was supported by capitalists like Armand Hammer and Alexander Parvus. Rong Yiren donated contributed substantial amounts of funding along with considerable clothing to PRC during Korean War. He then donated all his all private businesses to the state in 1956.
    2
  50. Given the context that Strasser, the leader of the radical Socialist faction of the Nazi Party, resigned from his party offices on 8 December 1932, one month after the Nazis “won” the last German unrigged election. Don’t you think it is illogical for any wealth owners to fund a violent political party, which had a paramilitary group filled with radical socialists that “expected the Nazi regime to take more radical economic action, such as breaking up the vast landed estates of the aristocracy, once they obtained national power” into power, even if Hitler was determined to go after bolsheviks?
    2
  51. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    2
  52. ⁠​⁠ @tpxchallenger  Hitler didn’t enrich capitalist with his policy "Through higher corporate tax rates, special war excess taxation, and by changing accounting rules, the Nazi regime substantially increased the tax burden for businesses, extracting up to 80% of the profits (see Banken 2018). At the same time, companies continued to pay the wealth tax. We estimate the corresponding wealth reduction to amount to 0.6% of net private wealth." (Wealth and its Distribution in Germany, 1895-2018, Thilo N. H. Albers, Charlotte Bartels, Moritz Schularick) _____________________ Expropriation did happened Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party. ————————— Nationalisation did happened The Reichsbahn - the German railways - and the Reichsbank - the German Bank - officially nationalized in 1937 under the Act of “Gesetz zur Neuregelung der Verhältnisse der Reichsbank und der Deutschen Reichsbahn. The corporate law in 1937 that removed the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938) 2. Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.), That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224)
    2
  53.  @animalfarm7467  Sorry didn't read though all the cases. Those companies were very unpatriotic. However regardless what those companies do after 1/1933, they still didn’t fund Hitler into power in 1/1933, which is the premise of this video. And again those companies cannot refute anyone from practicing Socialism just by having interaction with them. Because there are also tons of cases that capitalist companies interacted with Communist States. Like again Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers had business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. It didn’t mean the USSR was not a Socialist State in those years. The other cases would be Cuba, it also actively seeking investment from foreign capitalist companies, does it make them not practising Socialism?
    2
  54. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    2
  55. Publicity is not money.
    2
  56.  @tpxchallenger Surely it can be transferred into money or needed to purchase with money, but publicity itself is not money.
    2
  57.  @tpxchallenger  But the argument if this video is “Hitler WASN’T funded into power by the capitalists”. If giving publicity to the NSDAP constitute UFA funded Hitler, you can also say CNN funded Trump in the 2016 elections.
    2
  58. You mean this one? 7:22 or you meant in November 1932, 19 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture wrote a petition to Hindenburg demanding Hitler be made chancellor? Firstly, petition was not fund. Secondly, in the same November 1932, there were 339 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture signed election manifesto “With Hindenburg for the People and the Reich”. The call supported the Papen cabinet and turned against the NSDAP. (Henry Ashby Turner : The big entrepreneurs and the rise of Hitler)
    2
  59. Have you ever read the article “The Ford Motor Company and The Third Reich” from the Anti Defamation League? The TL;DR version is the executives board of Fordwerke got gradually replace and controlled by Nazi.
    2
  60. The short answer is all those things happened before WWII begin and after Nazi rised to Power. Those international companies have freedom to conduct business everywhere as long as their governments didn’t forbidden them to do, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers also had business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. Did it also prove the USSR was also not a Socialist State in those years? Besides those company cannot refute anyone from practicing Socialism just by having interaction with them, they also didn’t fund Hitler into power which should be done on or before 1/1933, when Hitler became Chancellor.
    2
  61. ⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠ @lebenstraum666  The very big part you have neglected was those [the essential weakness of reformist socialism] also existed in Marxist Leninism worked in practice. All of them fused Communism with Nationalism (National Communism), making the Communists leaders into the ruling New Class, and ruled the countries in (mostly) central plan economy with [hierarchy and castle] stronger than the Nazi, Fascist and even the Liberal Socialist. Together with all those common atrocities they committed and similar policy they push out, it make Nazism and Fascism able to position right in the middle in the spectrum of Socialism. Nazis Germany and Fascist Italy were neither running a Totalitarian Communist Economy nor a Democracy Socialist Economy. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were running a Totalitarian Socialist Economy where the property administrator(the owner who had no legal property right anymore) had more control than the administrator of the Communist state. Still, they were much more regulated by the state when compared with the property owner in a social democratic state, which made the Nazi and and Fascist economic system set right in the middle of the Socialist economic Spectrum.
    2
  62. Why didn't those "old elites" fund the German National People's Party, a national-conservative and monarchist political party, instead? Given the context that Strasser, the leader of the radical Socialist faction of the Nazi Party, resigned from his party offices on 8 December 1932, one month after the Nazis “won” the last German unrigged election. Don’t you think it is illogical for any "old elites" to fund a violent political party, which had a paramilitary group filled with radical socialists that “expected the Nazi regime to take more radical economic action, such as breaking up the vast landed estates of the aristocracy, once they obtained national power” into power.
    2
  63. Yes, but involuntarily, his control over the German Fords was gradually stripped by the Nazis, according to the ADL, and not before Hitler got into power in 1/1933. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If this logic worked: 1. Lenin would be a Monarchist, as it was the German Empire that helped him get back to Russia during WWI. 2. Nazis would also be Communist because Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). 3. Soviet Communist would be Fascist as Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped USSR to build the destroyer Tashkent.
    2
  64. There was not common understanding between the industrialists as a whole and Nazi in 1932 in the same November 1932, there were 339 representatives of industry, finance and agriculture signed election manifesto “With Hindenburg for the People and the Reich”. The call supported the Papen cabinet and turned against the NSDAP. (Henry Ashby Turner : The big entrepreneurs and the rise of Hitler) _____________________ Regarding Nationalised Trade Union: Historically Nazi, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade Union——Nationalisation. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF, like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions. “Today we can no longer confine ourselves to proclaiming the dictatorship of the proletariat. The trade unions have to be governmentalised; they have to be fused with state bodies. The work of building up large-scale industry has to be entrusted entirely to them. But all that is not enough. “(V. I. Lenin Report at the Second All-Russia Trade Union Congress January 20, 1919) Use the CTC of Cuba as an example. Non of them have right to strike and collective bargaining. (Por Pedro Pablo Morejon, There Aren’t Any Real Unions in Cuba) “There was no change in Cuba where the single trade union system persists, there is no genuine collective bargaining and the right to strike is not recognised in law. “ (2007 Annual Survey of violations of trade union rights - Cuba) _________________ Nazi did oppress the capitalists even after July, 1934. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system. (Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.) “Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.) I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory... (Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.) There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ” ( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.) Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates, or directly by the Nazi Government. "A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112) ​​⁠ —————————————— Expropriation did happened Thyssen AG was expropriated in 1939 after Thyssen, a Nazi member, sent Hermann Göring a telegram saying he was opposed to the war, shortly after arriving in Switzerland with his family. (I paid Hitler, p.38) The properties of Heinrich Lübbe (Arado Flugzeugwerke), Professor Junker (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG) (Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P17.) were seized by the State just because they refused to joined the Nazi Party. ————————— Nationalisation did happened The Reichsbahn - the German railways - and the Reichsbank - the German Bank - officially nationalized in 1937 under the Act of “Gesetz zur Neuregelung der Verhältnisse der Reichsbank und der Deutschen Reichsbahn. The corporate law in 1937 that removed the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938) 2. Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.), That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224) _____________________ Capitalists definitely didn't get richer under Nazi Ruling "Through higher corporate tax rates, special war excess taxation, and by changing accounting rules, the Nazi regime substantially increased the tax burden for businesses, extracting up to 80% of the profits (see Banken 2018). At the same time, companies continued to pay the wealth tax. We estimate the corresponding wealth reduction to amount to 0.6% of net private wealth." (Wealth and its Distribution in Germany, 1895-2018, Thilo N. H. Albers, Charlotte Bartels, Moritz Schularick)
    2
  65.  @buoazej  In the meantime, Soviet Union supplied Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). Communist Romania also accepted loans from Capitalist Western countries since early 1970s. Having any economic transaction with Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist would not make any state become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist state.
    2
  66. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    2
  67. Hitler became chancellor/ get into power in January 1933. TIK addressed that meeting here. 9:41
    2
  68. Every member of the executive branches of IG Farben were members of the Nazi Party, except the one who was a Swiss national and therefore exempt. (Jeffreys, “Hell’s Cartel,” Kindle Chapter 9. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p104.)
    2
  69. ⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠ @michaelwebb1071 Because the main point of this video is “Big Businesses (except Thyssen) did not fund Hitler into Power” surely supported came after Hitler got into power would not count. Not only Nazis, even Communists were more than happy to take money from capitalists. In many cases for Communists and some for Nazis, they would even force the capitalists to end themselves to take their money.
    2
  70.  @commonwombat-h6r  Hitler didn’t win the 3/1933 election, they didn’t get enough seat in Reichstag to pass everything . Hitler gained his dictatorship with the enable act.
    2
  71. Hitler rearmed to the war via nationalizing the control of German’s banks and industry and capital in private sector.
    2
  72. ⁠ @buoazej  The raw material from Soviet Union to Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939) would also be very handy.
    2
  73.  @news_internationale2035 There is a whole article “Nazi persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany” on wiki.
    2
  74. Swtiska was also used in the old logo of the Finnish airforce and the US 45th Infantry Division, what are you trying to imply?
    2
  75. As TIK claimed Fritz Thyssen was the only industrialist who committed to support Hitler prior to Hitler seizure of power. 10:22 August von Finck - the related section 8:15 Bush - Firstly, they didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. Secondly, not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, would it also make Hitler a Communist because the USSR also “supported” him? How about those Soviet communists? They were also “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. The other case would be Cuba. It is currently actively seeking investment from foreign capitalist companies. Does it make them not practising Socialism?
    2
  76.  @michaelwebb1071  What made those Socialists that Hitler murdered not his political foes?
    1
  77. Because they made deal with a sectioned country that USA fought against during WWII.However those Bank didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. Secondly, not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, would it also make Hitler a Communist because the USSR also “supported” him? How about those Soviet communists? They were also “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. The other case would be Cuba. It is currently actively seeking investment from foreign capitalist companies. Does it make them not practising Socialism?
    1
  78. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    1
  79. Firstly, those happened after 1933, after Hitler get into power. Secondly, those companies didn’t “support” Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively. To answer your more fundamental question, would anyone become a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist just because they traded with or were supported by a Capitalist/Fascist/Nazi/Monarchist? If Hilter can be classified as Capitalist just because American capitalism “supported” him, Hitler would also be a Communist, because not only did Foreign Capitalist “supported” Nazi, Soviet Union also “supported” Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German–Soviet Credit Agreement (1939). At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods. Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent. Soviet communists were “supported” by Nazi German, Fascist Italy, not to mention the supported by lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII. With that logic USSR communism would just be the Nazism, Fascism, and Capitalist.
    1
  80. But not any ideology believe that they need to create a “national community” (Volksgemeinschaft) that serves the interests of the individual, which is able to satisfy popular demands in long run by “supplying goods to meet the individual needs of daily life and by so doing create the conviction that, through the productive collaboration of its members” (Mein Kampf)
    1