Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "VisualEconomik EN" channel.

  1.  @badluck5647  "Did you not watch the video? Private businessmen were getting rich on the war economy and stealing the assets of je wish businesses." Yes, and it was a bit wrong. Only the government and NSDAP officials were getting rich. You had to be a government employee / party member to even be a "business manager" in the first place. How Nazis run the government was almost identical to Stalin's USSR.
    6
  2. And Regan was wrong, and had no clue what either Fascism nor Liberalism means.
    6
  3.  @Feefa99  "Amazing how you can ignore what actully Karl Marx wrote, when he was massively critical towards government and how whole economy was managed. "Mean of production in hands of workers" Does not mean government do everything for you, he wanted to maximaze individual freedom of workers definitely not to centralize power to hands the rich businessmen, the politicians and other privileged people" I'm not even talking about Marxism or to be more specific, Communism. National Socialism, just like Fascism, came from the belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its dictatorship cannot achieve Socialism, and that only the State can properly organize a Socialist Society.
    5
  4. ​ @gabrielmenezes2761  "not socialism , state capitalism" By definition it was socialism, and "state capitalism" is an oxymoron and doesn't exist.
    5
  5.  @Feefa99  "Workers had no say how things were run. Not actually socialism at all ... Workers have no say in economy, no socialism." Wrong. It was socialism, it just wasn't Marxism. Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production. Nazis had the latter.
    4
  6.  @badluck5647  "That isn't socialism because the government didn't own or run the factory. " They did run the factories, the DAF specifically, who had their officers in manager position for the very reason, that the production was done how the NSDAP told it to be. The idea was to let the state control and direct the economy from the top-down without itself owning the means of production. As Hitler himself said: "A strong State will see that production is carried on in the national interests, and, if these interests are contravened, can proceed to expropriate the enterprise concerned and take over its administration. " - Hitler and I, quotes from unspecified earlier dates per Otto Strasser, Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin Company (1940) "Germany's economic policy is conducted exclusively in accordance with the interests of the German people. In this respect I am a fanatical socialist, one who has ever in mind the interests of all his people." - Speech on the 21st Anniversary of the National Socialist Party (24 February 1941)
    4
  7.  @murdelabop  and Lewis was wrong also. Fascism was strictly anti-clerical movement, and had nothing to do with Christianity. Mussolini was a fan of Friedrich Nietzsche after all.
    4
  8.  @Darkphilips-i1y  "Fascism is controlled capitalism. " Wrong. There is no such thing. Capitalism by definition is uncontrolled and operates under Markets, by the supply/demand principle. Meanwhile Fascism used Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian) , which was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of syndicates ("corporazione") representing each major industry. Mussolini's corporatist view stressed total state power over businesses as much as over individuals, via these governing industry bodies controlled by the Fascist party, in which businesses retained the responsibilities of property, but few if any of the freedoms.
    4
  9. Fascism most certainly was Far-Left, politically and economically. It was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology based on National Syndicalism which they adapted from Georges Sorel. It rejected individualism, capitalism, liberalism/democracy, and marxism. The means of production was organized by national worker syndicals (i.e. trade unions), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism. Fascism was an outgrowth of Sorellian Syndicalism, which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist socialism. The idea was that society would be consolidated (i.e., incorporated) into syndicates (in the Italian context, fascio/fasci) which would be regulated by and serve as organs for the state, or "embody" the state (corpus = body). The purpose was the centralization and synchronization of society under the state, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." As created by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile, Fascism comes from a belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its dictatorship cannot achieve Socialism, and that only the State can properly organize a Socialist Society. It cared about unity in a strong central government with society being brought together by syndicalist organizations obedient to the State.
    3
  10. It was just socialism. Nothing to do with Capitalism of any kind.
    3
  11.  @Darkphilips-i1y  "Where the government has a heavy hand in the economy." That is known as socialism, which is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production.
    3
  12. " in short state capitalism.." Doesn't exist and is an oxymoron. It was textbook socialism.
    3
  13. "They were pretty capitalist as private property was never abolished" Wrong and Wrong. They were strictly anti-capitalist and private property rights were abolished and made conditional. Individual ownership rights were understood to be strictly subordinate to collective discipline. It was not the individual ownership of property that concerned Fascists, but its subordination to collective control. Property was understood to perform social functions rather than to manifest individual rights. It was clear that the conception of property as a social function was broad enough to include socialization of the means of production, should that be required by the national interests as interpreted by the state.
    2
  14. "corporativism is a form of capitalism not an alternative to it. " Wrong. Corporatism has absolutely nothing to do with Capitalism whatsoever. Common English linguistics mistake. Corporatism has nothing to do with businesses. Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian) was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of syndicates ("corporazione") representing each major industry. Mussolini's corporatist view stressed total state power over businesses as much as over individuals, via these governing industry bodies controlled by the Fascist party, in which businesses retained the responsibilities of property, but few if any of the freedoms.
    2
  15. "They wanted companies to obey the state and be loyal but that is not anti capitalist" That is by definition, anti-capitalist. Also when the government has total control and can legally seize your property if it's used in a manner they dislike, it is not private property ownership. You are not the arbiter of what to do with your own stuff. You are merely a manager of your property, and merely so long as the Fascist state permits it.
    2
  16.  @Feefa99  "Nazis were socialist same way as North Korea called themselves democratic." Both are true. Nazis were socialists by definition, and North Korea is democratic to a degree since they allow people to vote and hold elections in the first place. Meanwhile in some socialist countries like Cuba, neither voting nor elections are a thing.
    2
  17.  @ArawnOfAnnwn  : It hasn't been a thing since corrupt people, known as politicians, won't let it be a thing... so much free money and power when being on a government payroll. Luckily some countries are taking baby steps towards a functional society, like Argentina thanks to Javier Milei. I guess countries need to start hitting triple digit inflation numbers before they start to understand basic economics and applying them in practice.
    2
  18. Fascism was a socialist ideology and it strictly opposed Capitalism.
    2
  19.  @larryc1616  : Nothing to do with Capitalism. It was textbook socialism.
    2
  20.  @jessynixx  Wrong. Left/Right dichotomy doesn't work that way.
    2
  21. They never defended Capitalism. Fascism was strictly a socialist and anti-capitalist ideology.
    2
  22. Need to point out, that Mussolini was always a socialist. However he was a former Marxist, and then embraced National Syndicalism which he then used as the basis of Fascism.
    2
  23.  @peeledonion991  "and helped corporations?" He most certainly didn't. On the contrary, he subjugated businesses under the goals set by the State. Also throughout the 1930s, Mussolini managed to nationalize over 75% of the Italian industry. Ah, the classic, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help".
    2
  24.  @peeledonion991  " Socialism is not when government does things." Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production. Fascists had the latter.
    2
  25.  @peeledonion991  "Italian Fascism wasn’t socialism since workers never owned the means of production, the state did and its supporters did." Socialism doesn't necessitate workers specifically owning the means of production. That is what Marxism is about.
    2
  26.  @murdelabop  "And yet the radical religious right in the United States hits all the characteristics of fascism." No. They have nothing to do with Fascism nor the Right. If anything, they are collectivists and advocating for Theocracy.
    2
  27. It was Far-Left. Nothing to do with Right wing of any kind.
    2
  28. Reminder that neither Hitler nor Franco were Fascists, as they had their own ideologies. Only Mussolini was. All of them were devout socialists, anti-capitalists and part of the 3rd position movement.
    2
  29. Nothing to do with some random "Right Wing Authoritarian leaning". National Socialism being a Far-Left ideology is a historical fact. It was a socialist 3rd position movement based on ethnonationalism. You cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd. However Nazism had nothing to do with Fascism. They were two fundamentally different ideologies.
    2
  30.  @msdm83  "right wing authorizations has 50 years of research behind it." It has existed only once within the last 50 years. The last time it was done by Augusto Pinochet in Chile, to prevent the country becoming a Cuba 2.0.
    2
  31.  @msdm83  "Hitler is on record saying that he used socialist rhethoric to attract the working class but was not socialist in any meaningful way. " Wrong. Hitler has never said such a thing. On the contrary, he has said multiple times that he and his movement are "proper socialism".
    2
  32.  @msdm83  "And that there was no need to greatly change the economic systems so long as the national goals were served." and nationalizing and collectivizing the economy was the only way to ensure, that the national goals were served. This is where their "Gleichschaltung" principle comes in. "Germany's economic policy is conducted exclusively in accordance with the interests of the German people. In this respect I am a fanatical socialist, one who has ever in mind the interests of all his people." - Speech on the 21st Anniversary of the National Socialist Party (24 February 1941) "A strong State will see that production is carried on in the national interests, and, if these interests are contravened, can proceed to expropriate the enterprise concerned and take over its administration. " - Hitler and I, quotes from unspecified earlier dates per Otto Strasser, Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin Company (1940)
    2
  33.  @msdm83  "They weren't anti capital they were anti Jewish or globalist capital." Hitler was both Capitalism as a whole and Bolshevism / Marxism as a "Jewish ploy". He didn't differentiate between capital and "global capital".
    2
  34.  @msdm83  "They weren't anti capital they were anti Jewish or globalist capital." Hitler saw both Capitalism as a whole and Bolshevism / Marxism as a "Jewish ploy". He didn't differentiate between capital and "global capital".
    2
  35.  @msdm83  "Nazism is a firm of fascism" Wrong. National Socialism and Fascism were two fundamentally different, socialist 3rd position ideologies.
    2
  36.  @msdm83  ". I've never heard anyone claim otherwise." Then you should go and read some actual history. For example Goebbels himself claimed that. "One might say that Fascism has reacted upon the creative life of the Italian people somewhat like sterilization. It is, after all, nothing like National Socialism. While the latter goes down to the roots, Fascism is only a superficial thing. That is regrettable, but one must recognize it clearly. National Socialism is really a way of life." - Dr. Joseph Goebbels, The Goebbels Diaries Then I also suggest reading some Italian historians, such as Renzo De Felice and his book "Fascism: An Informal Introduction to Its Theory and Practice".
    2
  37.  @msdm83  "Look at who modern fascist and Nazis ... Those were mostly parties that had roots in neo fascist parties." So called "modern fascism" is properly known as Neo-Fascism, and there is only one country where it still exist in the mainstream politics. That would be Peronism, in Argentina. Regarding Neo-Nazism, it doesn't exist in mainstream politics but there are few such movements still out there... still advocating for socialism though.
    2
  38.  @msdm83  "with. the far right parties that did well the the European elections. " There are no Far-Right parties in Europe. There are only Right leaning parties. The only Far-Right person in the mainstream politics right now, is the latest Argentinian president, Javier Milei.
    2
  39. It wasn't Capitalism of any kind, nor was it privately owned per se. Individual ownership rights were understood to be strictly subordinate to collective discipline. It was not the individual ownership of property that concerned Fascists, but its subordination to collective control. Property was understood to perform social functions rather than to manifest individual rights. It was clear that the conception of property as a social function was broad enough to include socialization of the means of production, should that be required by the national interests as interpreted by the state. What Fascism had was called Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian), a socialist economic model. It was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of syndicates ("corporazione") representing each major industry. Mussolini's corporatist view stressed total state power over businesses as much as over individuals, via these governing industry bodies controlled by the Fascist party, in which businesses retained the responsibilities of property, but few if any of the freedoms.
    2
  40. Actually no. Nothing to do with hierarchies or such oligarchies per se. People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount (individualism) and the role — and especially the power — of the government is minimized.
    2
  41.  @Gingerphile00  "fasicsm is authoritarian centrism." No. It had nothing to do with centrism whatsoever. Fascism was based on National Syndicalism which is one of the branches of socialism. Social-Democracy is closer to centrism than Fascism.
    2
  42.  @ilesalmo7724  " left-right spectrum is different from authoritarian-libertarian spectrum (and conservative-progressive). " The fundamental differences between left-wing and right-wing ideologies center around the the rights of individuals vs. the power of the collective. Left-wing beliefs are based on the idea that society is best served with an expanded role for the group, for the benefit of it (collectivism). People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount (individualism) and the role — and especially the power — of the government is minimized. All that which limits individual power and increases collective power is on the left. All that which limits collective power and gives freedoms and civil liberties to individuals is on the right.
    2
  43.  @lukemurray4950  " National socialism is not socialism. " Wrong. By definition it was. You cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    2
  44.  @monkusaugustus4017  "he never claimed that national socialism is socialism," Hitler himself did though. In fact, he thought National Socialism was "proper socialism", and Marxism wasn't.
    2
  45.  @monkusaugustus4017  "Also socialism requires the abolition of private property, " Wrong. Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production. National Socialists had the latter. However, NSDAP did abolish private property rights with the Reichstag fire decree on February 28, 1933.
    2
  46. "fascism is free market capitalism with a command economy, not socialism at all" You are not making any sense. Free market Capitalism and Command economy are mutually exclusive, while Command economy being part of the Socialist economic system. Fascism had nothing to do with Capitalism whatsoever and as a socialist ideology it strictly opposed it. Fascism utilized Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian), which was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of syndicates ("corporazione") representing each major industry. Mussolini's corporatist view stressed total state power over businesses as much as over individuals, via these governing industry bodies controlled by the Fascist party, in which businesses retained the responsibilities of property, but few if any of the freedoms.
    2
  47.  @thetruedemocraticnorth  "central planning is socialism" By definition it is. Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production.
    2
  48.  @thetruedemocraticnorth  " and that Hitler was not capitalist." By definition he wasn't, and even according to his own very words. He specifically despised Capitalism and thought it was a "Jewish ploy". At the end of the day, you cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    2
  49.  @thetruedemocraticnorth  "I won't waist my time ..." Good. Stop commenting and go read some actual WW2 era history.
    2
  50. It wasn't a Market economy at all. In fact, it was a command economy.
    2