Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "Mark Felton Productions" channel.

  1.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was part of the Jewish plot..." Wrong. They had no prob lems with social ism. They claim ed that both capitalism and marxism/bolshevism were "Jewish ploys" to take over Germany.
    1
  2.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might appeal to nearly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They specifically wanted to appeal to other soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we Nati onal Soc ialists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Confidant (1978), p. 26
    1
  3.  currantbun2166  "The rebra nding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name sign ified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it "National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1
  4.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smooth conti nuity of comp anies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, B ayer etc.)." All nationalized and either directly owned by NS DAP or individually by its members, or the own ers were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  5.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Soci alists as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textbook example of socia lism. 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 soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He strug gled with HOW to distin guish his socia lism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  6.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to me ntion, both Le nin and Stalin persecuted other socialists after the October Revolution.
    1
  7.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising industry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ide als any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my mov ement to the de vil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  8.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was part of the Jewish plot..." Wrong. They had no problems with social ism. They claimed that both capitalism and marx ism/bolshe vism were "Jewish plo ys" to take over Germany.
    1
  9.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might appeal to nearly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They specifically wanted to appeal to other soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we National Socia lists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Confid ant (1978), p. 26
    1
  10.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it "National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the com munity of the people and must be to such an extent convi nced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1
  11.  @briangarlic  "thats the exact opposite of the very origin of Left/Right lmao. ... the original Right wing was pro-monarchy before the "Left" demanded more "freedom"" Yes, and for some reason our modern day political spectrum is inverted... otherwise Capitalism would still be on the left side and socialism would be on the right side.
    1
  12. " national socialism can be both " Wrong. National Socialism was specifically a totalitarian far-left, socialist ideology based on ethnonationalism.
    1
  13. "do not use far right or far left, these are completely subjective," Wrong. They certainly are not. The fundamental differences between left-wing and right-wing ideologies center around the the rights of individuals vs. the power of the government. Left-wing beliefs are based on the idea that society is best served with an expanded role for the government. People on the right believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount and the role — and especially the power — of the government is minimized.
    1
  14.  @theosphilusthistler712  "Is this meant to be ironic?" No. Germany didn't have a libertarian party nor any party which would have advocated for Classical Liberalism in general. I bet they still don't.
    1
  15.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to mention, both Lenin and Stalin persecuted other socialists after the Oct ober Revolution.
    1
  16.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising indu stry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the over riding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private prop erty, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  17.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was part of the Jewish plot..." Wrong. They had no problems with social ism. They claim ed that both capitalism and marxism/bolshevism were "Jewish ploys" to take over Germany.
    1
  18.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Soci alists as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textbook example of socia lism. 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 soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist internat ional or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  19.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smooth continuity of companies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, Bayer etc.)." All nationalized and either directly owned by NS DAP or individually by its members, or the owners were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  20.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might appeal to nearly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They specifically wanted to appeal to other soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we National Socialists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Com munists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Confidant (1978), p. 26
    1
  21.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it "National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Spe ech of April 12, 1922
    1
  22.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Soci alists as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textb ook example of socia lism. You cannot be an advocate for cen tralized 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 soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist interna tional or full Sovi et type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  23.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smooth continuity of companies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, Bayer etc.)." All nationalized and either directly owned by NS DAP or indivi dually by its mem bers, or the owners were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  24.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to mention, both Lenin and Stalin perse cuted other socia lists after the October Revol ution.
    1
  25.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising industry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the indi vidual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourg eoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourg eoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my move ment to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  26.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was part of the Jew ish pl ot..." Wrong. They had no problems with social ism. They claimed that both capitalism and marxism/bolsh evism were "Jewish ploys" to take over Germany.
    1
  27.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might appeal to ne arly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They specifically wanted to appeal to ot her soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we National Socialists wish precisely to attract all soci alists, even the Commu nists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Confidant (1978), p. 26
    1
  28.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sinc erity of our will, we christe ned it "National Socia list.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1
  29.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Soci alists as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textbook example of socia lism. You cannot be an advoc ate for centra lized 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 Bolshe viks, but he was still a soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Mar xist intern ational or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  30.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smooth continuity of companies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, Bay er etc.)." All nationalized and either directly ow ned by NS DAP or individually by its members, or the owne rs were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  31.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to mention, both Lenin and Stalin perse cuted other socia lists after the Oc tober Revolution.
    1
  32.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising industry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of auth ority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overrid ing point. The Third R eich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourge oisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  33.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was part of the Jewish plot..." Wrong. They had no problems with social ism. They claimed that both capi talism and marx ism/bolshe vism were "Jewish ploys" to take over Ger many.
    1
  34.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might appeal to nearly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They spec ifically wanted to appeal to other soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we National Socialists wish pre cisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Conf idant (1978), p. 26
    1
  35.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name sig nified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Move ment we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it "National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this comm unity of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Ad olf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1
  36.  @hardcorehistory9165  : "National Socialism is not Communism" Nobody has argued that it was or is.
    1
  37.  @aResoluteProtector  "National Socialism is NOT AT ALL the same as Socialism lol." Wrong. National Socialism was a socialist ideology.
    1
  38.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Socialis ts as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textbook example of socia lism. 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 Bolsh eviks, but he was still a soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Mar xist intern ational or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  39.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smo oth continuity of companies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, Ba yer etc.)." All nationalized and either directly owned by NS DAP or individually by its members, or the ow ners were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  40.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to mention, both Lenin and Stalin persec uted other soc ialists after the Oc tober Revo lution.
    1
  41.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising industry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the Sta te or the interests of his fellow count rymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bour geoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourg eoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  42.  currantbun2166  "In practice, they claimed that Socia lism was pa rt of the Jewi sh plot..." Wrong. They had no problems with social ism. They claimed that both capita lism and marxism/bolshevism were "Jewish ploys" to take over Germany.
    1
  43.  currantbun2166  "to make them at least sound like they might ap peal to nearly everyone. "_ They didn't want to appeal to everyone. They specifically wanted to ap peal to other soci alists, who were of the globalist mindset. “But we National Socialists wish precisely to attract all soci alists, even the Comm unists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one.” — Adolf Hit ler , Memoirs of a Confidant (1978), p. 26
    1
  44.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the deci sion that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the ba sis of the sincerity of our will, we christened it "National Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embra cing love for the people and, if necessary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every ind ividual acts in the interest of the community of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1
  45.  currantbun2166  "es, they were right-wing - they were absolutely not socialists. " Wrong and Wrong. They were far-left and a textbook example of socialists.
    1
  46.  currantbun2166  " (hence the smooth continuity of companies like Kr upp, Mer cedes, Bayer etc.)." All nationalized and either directly owned by NS DAP or indivi dually by its me mbers, or the owners were mem bers of the NS DAP already.
    1
  47.  currantbun2166  "They were as far from Soci alists as you can get."_ Wrong. They were a textbook example of socia lism. 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 soci alist leftist as he believed in strong central gover nment control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Mar xist intern ational or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  48.  currantbun2166  "attacked and persecuted real Socia lists" There is no such thing as "real soci alist", not to mention, both Lenin and Stalin persecuted other socialists after the October Revo lution.
    1
  49.  currantbun2166  "and never even did basic soci alist things like nationalising industry" Wrong. They did. They specifically nationalized most if not all the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitl er, Hitl er's inte rview with Ric hard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  50.  currantbun2166  "The rebranding to 'National Soci alism' was deliberate false advertising -"_ Wrong. It wasn't. The name signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level. “At the founding of this Movement we formed the decision that we would give expression to this idea of ours of the identity of the two conceptions: despite all warnings, on the basis of what we had come to believe, on the basis of the sincerity of our will, we chri stened it "Nati onal Socialist.' We said to ourselves that to be 'national' means above everything to act with a boundless and all-embracing love for the peo ple and, if neces sary, even to die for it. And similarly to be 'social' means so to build up the state and the community of the people that every individual acts in the interest of the com munity of the people and must be to such an extent convinced of the goodness, of the honorable straightforwardness of this community of the people as to be ready to die for it.” — Adolf Hit ler Munich - Speech of April 12, 1922
    1