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

@monkusaugustus4017 " if there are private businesses in the country, " There weren't. Businesses were nationalized and later reorganized into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party.
1
@monkusaugustus4017 " if the prices are controlled through markets " There were no markets of any kind. NSDAP had a Command economy similar to the USSR under Stalin.
1
@monkusaugustus4017 "and if the economy isn't planned by government bodies then it's not socialism," It was. Under NSDAP, the economy was centralized and planned. It was the Government which decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid.
1
@lukemurray4950 "So you clearly acknowledge and in Hitler's own words said there was clear differences. " I have never said that there wasn't a difference. National Socialism wasn't Marxism. They were two competing and rival socialist ideologies.
1
@lukemurray4950 "Socialism you are thinking of for one wants to destory the nation state today. " Depends on the socialist ideology.
1
@lukemurray4950 "National socialism wanted to build and strengthen the nation state." True, since it came 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.
1
@lukemurray4950 "National socialism is in favour of private property ownership and private competitive business." Wrong. It was in favor of neither. It was in favor of nationalization and Government controlled subsidiaries. Neither private property ownership nor competitiveness were a thing.
1
@lukemurray4950 " This is completely different to socialism which says that only the state should own property and their be no private business. " The idea of National Socialism was to let the state control and direct the economy from the top-down. Again, socialism says nothing. It's not an ideology. It's an economic system advocating for collective ownership or control of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods.
1
@lukemurray4950 "They say Hitler was an authoritarian capitalist when in fact National Socialism is literally in the middle of of Communism and Capitalism." That middle is still known as socialism. Where National Socialism and Communism differs, is the implementation of socialism.
1
@lukemurray4950 " Capitalism is being ruled by bankers, " No it isn't. There can be various different currencies under Capitalism, like BitCoin. If anything, Capitalism opposes central banks.
1
@lukemurray4950 "Marxism isn't even socialism. " Marxism is one of the many socialist ideologies.
1
@lukemurray4950 "National Socialism isn't socialism." Wrong. By definition it was. Instead of focusing on the class like Marxism, it focused on the mythical race and the "Volksgemeinschaft".
1
@lukemurray4950 "National socialism is an ideology that combines elements of Capitalism and Socialism to create the perfect system by counter balancing them between eachother." Wrong. National Socialism had nothing to do with Capitalism whatsoever. It strictly opposed it. Hitler himself thought that both the Marxist version of socialism and Capitalism were "Jewish ploys".
1
@lukemurray4950 "Like I said in Capitalism, capital rules." Capitalism is more than just the capital itself. Essentially it's just the result of free humans making voluntary exchanges with one another in the absence of outside coercion.
1
@lukemurray4950 "but gives people private property " No. It didn't. Again, private property rights were abolished with the Reichstag fire decree on February 28, 1933. They made owning property conditional and dependent on bending the knee to the Government. 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 Government permits it.
1
@lukemurray4950 "and ability to set up corporations to create a competitive market. " Nobody weren't allowed to set up anything, unless they were part of the NSDAP and even then, everything was still controlled by the Government via DAF. There were no markets, since National Socialism was based on a Command economy.
1
@lukemurray4950 "National Socialism can only be achieved by a democratic vote." But it wasn't achieved like that. National Socialism wasn't voted in. It was achieved via coalition, when Hindenburg appointed Hitler Chancellor in the coalition government.
1
@krakken- "Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1933. " Again, by definition they were. 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.
1
@krakken- "Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished." Wrong. The whole party was socialist and the entire regime consisted of former members of other leftist movements. For example, Goebbels was one of the most vocal proponents of socialism. Also the Night of the Long Knives had nothing to do with socialism nor socialists in the first place. It was strictly about the internal power struggle between the German army leaders, Hitler and Röhm.
1
@krakken- "OK, apparently you call central planning, regardless if it controlled by workers or business, and regardless of the state or those businesses owned the means of production." A centrally planned economy, also known as a command economy, is an economic system where a government body makes economic decisions regarding the production and distribution of goods. Centrally planned economies are different from market economies, where these decisions are the result of thousands of choices by producers and consumers. The production of goods and services in planned economies is often done by state-owned enterprises, although independent companies may sometimes be incorporated into economic planning. Prices, wages, and production schedules are typically set by a centralized bureaucracy.
1
@krakken- "Because I have never heard anybody else call business controlled central planning socialism. " Such a thing doesn't exist. In no country has private businesses ever controlled the government or the country itself.
1
@krakken- "Socialism, at least by every definition I have ever seen, a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. That is in no way what Nazis were. " 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.
1
@krakken- "The socialists and people on the left, at least by the definition used by everyone but you, were in concentration camps. " Not all socialists. Mainly their political opponents such as the Marxists... however this is nothing new. The same was done by the Bolshevik regime to their political rivals, after the October Revolution.
1
@krakken- "And the government was thoroughly right wing fascist (at least by the definitions used by everyone else, anyway)." Such definition has no basis in history nor in reality. Not only are National Socialism and Fascism two fundamentally different ideologies, but also both of them were on the Far-Left, adjacent to Marxism.
1
@krakken- " Use your definitions instead of the ones accepted by everyone else, " They are not my definitions. They are historical definitions. It is not my concern if everyone else uses incorrect definitions based on propaganda, however that is why I'm here after all, to educate people.
1
@krakken- "Redefining words obviously works on some people, " That is what many people on the Left have been doing since the end of the WW2.
1
... and for obvious reasons, they don't mention the simple fact that Mussolini was a socialist and his Fascism was still on the Far-Left side of the spectrum. Being a competing and rival socialist movement to Marxism, doesn't magically make someone Right wing.
1
@pinotpinotpinot "Yep, a common socialist movement that is.... hyper ethnic-nationalist, firmly traditionalist and reactionary on family values, against the emancipation of the working class, actively dismisses class conflicts alltogether, " Depends. Certainly most of them were common in Russia (Stalinism) and China (Maoism). However maybe you should remember, that socialism is not an ideology and represents no values. It's an economic system which advocates for collective direct ownership or control, of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods.
1
@pinotpinotpinot " closely involved with the church." Neither Fascism nor National Socialism were. Both Hitler and Mussolini were fans of Friedrich Nietzsche and didn't believe in religions.
1
@pinotpinotpinot "If you are to uneducated to comment on something, how about you don't comment at all?" Sound like an advice you should take.
1
@ShubhamMishrabro "State capitalism is different from socialism. " Again, "state capitalism" doesn't exist. It's an oxymoron.
1
@ShubhamMishrabro "China is state capitalist but not socialist. " Wrong. China still has a socialist economy, because the government still has a tremendous amount of control over private enterprises. There are private companies that operate in China, and not everything is owned by the government; however, with a single party in power, the government is able to change the direction of the economy significantly with the stroke of a pen. Therefore, there are a lot of companies that are unsure of exactly what will happen in the future because they are at the mercy of the government.
1