Comments by "David Himmelsbach" (@davidhimmelsbach557) on "TIKhistory"
channel.
-
@livingwill1 The kicker with steam locomotives is that they use a tremendous amount of labor on a per-mile basis. So as their utilization sky-rockets, the shops become jammed with work. This soon proved to be a choke point within the transport economy -- as you just can't throw common labor at such capital intensive heavy repair work. A minor taste of such work was illustrated on film in "The Train." Our hero (Lancaster) shows what a project it is just to repair a minor component. This particular repair had to be performed a million times during WWII. For the driving piston and its bearings ALWAYS gave way after so many miles.
As the Nazis expanded their terror empire, their ton-miles via railroad simply exploded. It didn't matter which side of the border the locos originated, there were never enough. Check out the USA and Canada. They went CRAZY trying to expand their locomotive fleet -- AND their rolling stock, too.
As for Stalin, his prison-state was critically short of locomotives virtually from the start -- as the Luftwaffe deliberately went after them. Steam locomotives are the easiest pickings a strafing pilot could imagine. By the fall of '41, the USSR was so short of main-line locomotives that the Siberian troops had to trudge the last hundreds of miles on foot. Stalin had brought a surge of such troops. So great was the panic, there were not enough locomotives to pull them all the way from Siberia in the time allotted. Further, their very existence (movement from the East) would've been betrayed by slews of locomotives showing up within range of Luftwaffe reccee flights.
The 2,000 American locomotives were CRITICAL for Stalin as the Nazis had bagged his Number One locomotive factory. It was in Leningrad -- the city from which the ENTIRE Soviet rail net expanded. This reality goes back to when the Tsar established it with imported machines. (French, IIRC -- Britain hated Russia as a geopolitical rival.) The very first substantial line ran from St. Petersburg to Moscow -- and was built for the Tsar and his family. The Tsar did not think of it as an industrial asset ! For him, his railroad was conceived as if it were a private jet -- almost a toy. He was keeping up with the other royals... and nothing more. (!!!) He was not too bright.
Subsequent expansion of the Tsarist grid aimed at hooking the royals up with their other estates. That's why every last one of them is just off the rail line -- but not so close that locomotive noise reached vacationing royals. These are now Russian tourist meccas.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TIK's presentation is pretty awesome but there are elements that need to be laid forth:
Monty's panic request for 2,000+ GMC deuce & half 6x6 trucks. That delayed the show by three-days right off.
Monty's failure to request jeeps by the thousand -- this is inexplicable. The US Army could've coughed up thousands in no time. It'd take the Brits about 5minutes training time to drive a jeep. The 82nd and 101st proved that jeeps could drive ANYWHERE in a polder, their ground pressure and 4x4 drive made it a snap.
Monty FROZE the front line by his own volition. Yup. Even the START LINE is where it was because Browning and Monty wanted this airborne drop to be quite the show. Yup. They'd experienced so many cancelled drops because the Allied armies (typically the 2nd Army) over-ran the intended drop zones. These were always intended to take river-lines.
(Patton went south very happily because there were no serious river lines in front of him until late in the advance. He was following the classic route of invasion -- and damn well knew it. Monty was NOT taking the normal invasion route. The lower Rhine has usually stopped EVERY army. It's the Afghanistan of Europe. It's the reason that Switzerland has been invaded more often. )
THIS is the emotional back ground behind Monty and Browning's mutual decision to stop the 2nd Army. Right off, they figured that the war was over and that, having built it, it was time for the Airborne Army to be employed. This would be its last shot. These rivers were the ONLY target left in Northwest Europe that justified an airborne assault.
[ A similar panic hit the American 10th Mountain Division. It had been trooping all over Colorado for YEARS to scare Hitler into keeping a complete army up in Norway. Only late in the war, it panicked. It had to get into the war, PDQ. When it was committed, it blew the German army clean out of Italy in extremely short order. But that's another story. ]
TIK never brings up the single most obvious boner: why in the Hell was the 101st dropped so close to XXX Corps when the twin prizes begged for it to land between them? It's not as if there were ANY FLAK guns in the middle of farmland. Duh.
The need to protect landing zones had NO MEANING as this zone was an ISLAND. Get it? It was totally devoid of ANY Germans. ( I'm not going to count the bridge micro-garrisons. ) So, you could land ANYWHERE on the island. It SCREAMED: land here, you won't even bust your butt!
It's panzer-proof, too. Once the bridges are blocked the ISLAND is impossible for the Germans to get onto. Blocking the occasional ferry attempt would be child's play.
IMAGINE, your critical targets are north and south of an unoccupied island -- made so by rivers so vast that it takes the largest bridges in Europe to get across. And the Germans have no boats to speak of. No amphibious capability at all.
And then imagine two excellent British generals ignoring these salient facts. -- But not just them -- let's toss in their staffs -- and the American airborne generals, too.
Folks, this is VICTORY DISEASE on steroids.
ALL involved wanted this battle to go off as a show piece. And it blew up in their faces.
VICTORY if any of the following:
If the start line was advanced prior to MG,
101st dropped correctly,
Jeeps used by XXX Corps for its infantry,
TAC AIR,
Browning up in the sky -- like Ike, sure, he'd lend his P-51 to Browning,
VT fuses for XXX Corps,
Dutch telephone net actually used,
Dutch advice actually taken,
Hindustani used as British code talk,
Recognition of the Waal ferry -- the one British Airborne blew up -- and then needed.
[The assignment of USN blimps on day 2. There was virtually no FLAK until you're right over Arnhem. Blimps are floating mountains in the sky -- TOTALLY rigged for ground observation. They all had radios out you rears -- and optics beyond belief. Binoculars so heavy that they had to be mounted. (!) They could see a rat from 4,000 feet. Unlike a plane, they just hover. Subs and troops just run away when they see a blimp overhead. You just can't shoot them down. And they're bring absolute artillery and mortar Hell down upon you.]
[ Most of the British regulars spoke Hindustani. Generals and troopers, alike. The US used Native Americans in the Pacific, why pray tell this was not an obvious play for the British with so many called back from India? ]
Suddenly the 'Gavin Thesis' lies dead and buried.
Frost is right, TIK is wrong. This was a British operation, and Gavin, et. al. were told from on high, don't cross the Brits up. Don't make waves. Let them make ALL the decisions. Don't fight senior British officers at any time.
Imagine the repercussions if you turned out to be right! The chit storm would never die.
1
-
1
-
1
-
BOTH sides were desperate and dehydrated. Even with their backs at the Don, the Soviets were not getting water to the front! Even when the Germans got to the Don, they found it virtually impossible to drink -- as the Reds kept shooting at them. This tactic became ever famous after Uranus. THIRST is the Big Story.
You'll also note that the German panzers need refit -- rather constantly -- same as North Africa -- as the dust is hardly different than the Sahara. Most tanks are dying from this dust -- not enemy action. That's why even rear area Soviets are pathetically weak.
Many of the 'Soviet defeats' were actually retreats to get back to the WATER at the Don. The Germans pressed on -- fanatically -- to get TO the water, to the Don.
EVERY account I've ever read tells of astounding heat and thirst.
The primary reason 6th Army had no horses when surrounded at Stalingrad was because the boys had EATEN them, already. That's how bad the boys were being supplied.
The Soviets didn't defeat the Germans. The Germans defeated the Germans.
By the time 6th Army was upon the Volga, the boys were totally worn out... as in they'd lost a lot of body weight. You don't see a single photo of a fat German from that area and that time.
Even Paulus was lean... very lean by the standards of his time.
Whereas, the Reds were bringing in fresh boys, who'd not been totally famished, all the while. Logistics totally decided the campaign -- something that the ground-pounders just did not appreciate. By this time, Germany was already cooked. The soldiers just didn't know it.
BTW, Stavka was totally foolish to defend to the west of the Don. The river was a killer defensive position. It was utterly stupid to not defend behind it. By expending so many troops, Stavka (Stalin) threw away the rational defense of the Volga. What a fool. No marshal could talk him out of his folly, obviously.
It took the battle -- a catastrophe -- for Stalin to give the reins to Zukov & company. After that, the Soviets never lost. What an amazing coincidence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mitch ... EVERY single account has the Reds being bagged straight at the FRONT... starting with Brest-Litovsk. The Stalin Line proved to be entirely EMPTY.
Stalin ordered INSTANT counter-attacks -- with objectives deep into Nazi occupied Poland... right from the start. Whereas ANY military graduate would've insisted upon a defensive posture to channel the Germans into super-kill zones.
Red officers were totally demoralized as Stalin imposed a top-down rigid command structure. THAT was their problem. As for supplies, the Germans were astounded as to how well equipped the Reds were. So MANY tanks, so MANY guns... stuff better than their own. Namely the 76.2 field gun that could kill tanks and shoot conventional rounds.
The Reds looked weak in retrospect because Guderian had CUT OFF their routine ammunition resupply -- at the rail heads. Their few decent tanks (T-34/ KV-1) were still not properly supplied with ammo. This was because they were THAT new. The 76.2MM gun was a new, hot item in 1941. The Reds were still scaling up.
As for artillery tubes: the Reds drastically out-matched the Germans. Stalin prioritised his army and air force. However, both were in transition from 1930's technology to 1940's technology. Because of their treaty, the Reds knew exactly what Guderian & Coy were bringing to the fight. (pop-gun 37mm Mark IIIs) The T-34 & KV-1 were their response. Even in 1941 the Reds were out-producing the Germans in tanks. The Germans were THAT slow off the mark.
The same 'crippled' Red Army invaded EVERY western neighbor, except Nazi Germany. Stalin didn't consider himself to be running a clown circus, nor could Hitler.
Famously, Adolf commented that if he'd only known that the Reds had 35,000 tanks he'd have totally reconsidered Barbarossa. Yup. The outside world didn't have a CLUE that Stalin had that many machines.
Such a tank force tells you all that you want to know about where Stalin's head was at. Other than Germany, NONE of his neighbors had a tank force worth talking about. (What a pacifist... NOT.)
As for pre-war and post-war Soviet military diplomacy -- they were ALWAYS in attack mode -- right up until 1991. They NEVER had a defensive doctrine.
The ONLY matter at issue was WHEN Stalin was in a position to attack.
Stalin even went after Truman when Truman had the Bomb -- and he didn't. How aggressive can you get?
There is NO nation on the periphery of the USSR that didn't feel threatened -- all the time.
Even today, the Baltics are fearful that they're about to get the Donetz 'solution.' Yet, Russia is weaker than ever -- save for its astounding nuclear arsenal.
Kid, you just don't have history on your side.
Do NOT take this argument to mean that I'm pro-Nazi. They damn near killed my father and my uncle.
Adolf merely calculated that time was absolutely NOT on his side.... Like Stalin, he kept looking back to WWI for his instructional.
That was an epic mistake for both of them.
1
-
@ Mitch ... open your eyes.
You started off with an ad hominem against John Mosier. Weak.
Then you shifted to an appeal to authority. Weak.
Then you're back to ad hominem. Very weak.
Glantz's problem is that he actually believes internal Red Army documents. Whereas MANY Red officers have written that higher command's internal reports didn't have ANY correspondence with the facts in the field -- and they knew because they were in the battle at issue !
All of this is because Stalin would SHOOT any officer kicking the 'wrong' information upstairs.
The facts are beyond dispute:
1) The Reds WERE at the border. They WERE bagged by the thousands from the very start of the German invasion.
2) They were so far forward that within days they were out of supply -- as Guderian and Hoth had driven east into the Soviet rail net -- cutting off supplies at their source for the entire front. THIS was the trick during the early daze of Barbarossa. It did not last all that long.
( BTW, you'd be stunned as to how few rail lines led into Poland from the USSR. Going back to the Czars, such lines were just not built. Amazingly, the primary purpose of the Russian rail net -- from the beginning -- was to roll the Czar and his family around Russia. It was not built to support industry or commerce. All industry had to 'chase' the rails. That's the reason that 4-10-2 locomotives were in use, too. The lines were dead straight for miles and miles on end. In North America, all railroads stopped with 4-8-4 -- then shifted to articulated 4-6-6-4 designs.)
3) The REAL reason that Adolf went north and south instead of Moscow: the Ju-52 super-fiasco. Yup. This fiasco has been buried by ALL German accounts -- especially Guderian's. He was at the center of it. What happened? The landing gear under EVERY Ju-52 was being destroyed as they landed fuel and parts for Guderian's spear-head panzers. Yup. By the time Adolf showed up, the Luftwaffe was in crisis. There were 'dead' Ju-52s all over Russia. On a totally panic basis the RLM had to kludge up an enhanced landing gear repair kit. These were then flown out to Russia. All the while the planes were cracking up, Guderian BURIED the facts. He buried this fiasco in his own war bio, too.
But the Ju-52 was the linch-pin for his blitz. They were the reason he was able to defy expectation and just keep driving east. Even when the Russians had cut him off, the Luftwaffe just flew over the Russians and re-supplied the panzers. (!) Instead of coiling back, Guderian just drove even further east. Hurrying Heinz, indeed! The Russians were NOT being pocketed -- something that every idiot writes was happening. Guderian was simply going east faster than a man could walk. By grabbing every river crossing of note, they gradually trapped virtually every Red soldier. They fell behind, into the arms of the advancing German infantry. Without resupply, every formation ran out of gas and ammo. They were down to fists and knives.
Without their air lift fleet, Plan A was dead. THAT'S why Adolf sent his panzers to the wings. That's why all other generals assented. They couldn't drive into the zone of maximum rail road concentration without their air fleet.
4) Postwar: the USSR reversed ALL of Stalin's strategic errors. Under the new rules, the Red Army was to NEVER place their main body near the front. Further, the Ju-52 fleet was replaced by a massive helicopter fleet. This scheme is the reason why the Reds built the world's largest helicopters. They're too big for combat. They were built solely to fly fuel to Red tank spear-heads. As helicopters, they'd never suffer the landing troubles that the Ju-52 did. As for the Nazi Germans, they redesigned their airlift towards the centipede landing gear. (The C-130, C-5, C-17 uses a variation on this... a super robust assembly with excess tires for soft ground.) Their new design never had much impact as it was not so useful for defense, for retreat.
Mitch, you just don't know that much. Fifty-years of study makes a difference. Believe it.
Argue from FACTS -- not ad hominem.
1
-
@Mitch... you are of slow wit. I'm not backing Rezun. I'm stating that John Mosier has a solid argument.
1) The Bolsheviks never DIDN'T aggress against their neighbors -- straight through from 1918 to 1991. It didn't matter who it was: Red China, Nazi Germany, Poland, Finland, Romania, NATO, the Baltics, eastern Czechoslovakia (when Hitler took the rest of that nation) -- and Korea and Iran.
2) That the USSR was not ready in 1941 is obvious to all. But Stalin was going to be pretty well set for 1942. That is what was obvious to German generals, virtually all of whom DIDN'T want to invade east. But, they couldn't argue that Stalin wouldn't be ready in 1942. EVERYTHING pointed to it as being a moment of maximum threat. By that time, Nazi Germany would be in DIRE straits WRT liquid fuels -- all of them. So much so that the Luftwaffe would be compromised. Further, Ploesti was WAY too close to the eastern Romanian frontier. Stalin had ALREADY put his strongest formation directly across from ROMANIA -- not Nazi Germany. Stalin knew that Ploesti was THE strategic prize. Yeah, it was that obvious.
Since Barbarossa, the Soviets totally changed their strategic doctrine. All during the Cold War their doctrine was: keep the Red Army on the defense from NATO -- with the very best weapons held at the Second Echelon -- ie inside the USSR. NEVER permit the First Echelon to deploy close to the border. It must be ready to motor there, but not be deployed there until hostilities are authorized by Moscow. This is why the 20th Guards Army was held back at Magdeburg all during the Cold War. It awaited orders coming from Zossen, HQ for the Western Direction. Ironically, Zossen started life as Hitler's twin HQ: OKW & OKH. It was so secret that the Red Army was shocked when they over-ran it in April 1945.
You're not well read, you don't know much, you don't argue well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TIK
I went to Google and found a ton of images. Pretty sloppy data set: lots of not-88mm guns.
http://nationalinterest.org/files/styles/main_image_on_posts/public/main_images/88_mm_gun_eighty-eight_8.8_cm_flak_flickrjoost_j._bakker_ijmuiden.jpg?itok=Du5U4qY
Limbered 88mm guns LOOK like they're on trucks. They have wheels, etc. but no motive power.
If you look closely, their out-riggers can be dropped for firing even without un-limbering the gun from its carriage.
It's a split carriage BTW. The gun-mount is an integral part of the travelling chassis. It's hard to see, but two of the four supports ride between the tires// axles -- while those going left and right are plain to see.
At Arras, Rommel used 88s in both states. When the battle started, a FLAK battery had been already set up to drive off the RAF. This was a crew that didn't want to engage Matildas, BTW. Rommel shows up and orders these crews to shift to a PAK role. The were seriously pissed. This would require them to nix their standing order from on high. Rommel reminded them that he was the boss of their boss -- so get with it -- NOW!
This battery opened up Matildas -- much to the amazement of the 88 crews -- they'd never practiced against ground targets even once -- and the leading Matildas 'brewed up' // opened up like tuna cans.
As the battle flowed, 88s -- probably these very same fellas -- were towed after the British ( brought to new firing positions ) -- and the situation was so hectic that they started firing from a limbered position. When limbered, the side struts would be dropped -- this takes seconds, and then the crew does their duty. The road wheels are left as-is. This is why MOST distant observers would absolutely take such weapons to be truck-mounted 88s. I think that this is how the reference to truck-mounted 88s got rolling.
When limbered, the 88 is no where near as accurate, but it sure is a heck of a lot more mobile. It was after Rommel that the Heer realized that firing 88s while limbered was a VERY viable tactic. Previously, it was not recommended, simply not part of the 'FLAK syllabus.'
You'd never use a FLAK36 in a limbered condition to defend against aircraft. It'd be shooting all over the sky. Heh.
The Germans DID improvise 20mm and 37mm mounted upon truck chassis. This occurred before they cross-mounted these guns to tracked chassis. It was quickly determined that a truck chassis may be quick and cheap, but is actually quite impractical in combat.
1) It rocks way too much. You can't stay on target. It's hopeless.
2) In rotten weather ( mud ) you lose the machine all together. (Sucks!)
If there is one constant with German weapons designs, they couldn't stop changing things. Would you believe that even within major production runs, the Germans were changing this or that before even ten tanks went by? Yup.
In practice, virtually every German major weapon was semi-custom. This was WHY so many German tanks were out of the line. They had to constantly phone back to the factory for semi-custom repair parts. With multiple factories, they couldn't even count on MAN's stuff to repair Henschel's. (!!!)
The contrast with the American M4 was night and day. In the last twenty-five years tank collectors attempting to rebuild Shermans discovered that you could take a 44 Chrysler tranny and bolt it to a 42 GM Sherman -- and the fit was perfect.
Nothing like such repairs was ever possible when restoring German equipment.
The Soviets were half-way between. They had a standardized design, but their factory standards were SO sloppy that T34s were a plant, by plant, affair. But with their production numbers, one plant could flesh out an entire tank corps. *
( * The Reds stopped using the term tank division, BTW. So you have to watch out. Many Soviet accounts will refer to the 1st Tank Corps -- when it's the division that they mean. I've read one account of Kursk that transformed the SS Pioneer Corps into three SS tank corps: 1st, 2nd, 3rd. ( BTW, the 3rd arrived so late that it was a surprise to the Russians. They expected only the 1st and 2nd.) ( It had come straight from France, on the QT, and naturally looked to all outside observers to be one or the other of the former.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TIK
Soviet archives made me a believer.
Yeltsin produced them. They were astonishing.
Until then I never knew that Stalin picked the launch date, the partition line, etc. ( It was not negotiated at all, Stalin was given carte blanche so long as he was willing to sign on the line that was dotted.) Yes the archives detail that the treaty specified that BOTH nations would invade Poland September 1st, 1939.
He used a FAT crayon, BTW.
The original was kept by the Soviets, the Germans had to make do with a copy. Stalin initialled it, BTW. He was big into pencils -- notably a blue pencil.
(Shades of Harold Geneen of ITT fame, the corporate tyrant.)
Adolf ALWAYS wanted to launch his war.
He remained boxed in until Stalin let the devil run free.
Stalin's oil is the primary reason that France fell.
It energized the Luftwaffe. At all times prior, London and Paris had kept a weather eye on German avgas stocks.
There was a concerted Allied economic strategy to keep Germany on a short leash. ( Rubber, Oil, etc. were controlled by London, Paris and Washington. This leverage was their first go-to solution for tyrants. You'll note that this is STILL the West's opening gambit even today.)
Stalin broke the chains. THIS is what freaked Britain and France out.
It was transparent to Britain ( First Sea Lord Churchill ) that war had begun August 23, 1939 -- so he put the Royal Navy to sea -- and on a war footing right then and there.
I'm sure that Googling will pull it up. I just can't read Cyrillic script.
The first place I read about it (just summaries) was in the British press. So if you're able to go back through their archives, I'm sure that some articles will pop up.
1
-
1
-
@Alexander
WRT Iceland, which is a colony of Denmark...
My school buddies father was a member of the Danish king's personal body guard. They were the platoon that got him out of Denmark right in front of the SS. ( Strange that the Heer was not detailed for this mission. )
Being the ONLY military formation left standing after Denmark was occupied, they were stationed on Iceland.
Britain was allowed to occupy Iceland with the King's permission.
When Churchill returned from Nova Scotia and his naval visit with FDR, he made a pit stop at Iceland. This is when my acquaintance was able to shake Churchill's hand, as the Danish 'Army' was in the front ranks of those assembled. They were joined by Britain's other European allies, mainly Holland. Every nation BUT the Danish made it into the newsreel footage. It was determined that the Nazis would retaliate against any Danish family that had a son in the King's body guard. They sure were pissed that the King got away.
Eventually my man ended up shipping out to the Dutch East Indies -- and after watching the IJN sink everything in sight, Battle of the Java Sea, he migrated over to the USN.
As for Iran ( it, the word, means Aryan in Farsi ) they jumped into bed with Adolf Hitler. ( Hence the name change away from Persia.) THAT'S why both Britain and the USSR invaded. It turned out to be quite convenient, too. As a land bridge to southern Russia was just what the doctor ordered. Arkangel was a bitch.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brianlong2334 It was the DIFFERENCE MAKER. BTW. Romanian oil is actually of low quality. Soviet (Baku, Mykop, etc.) was much better. It's like coal fields. Some are better than others. It's not true that all crude oil is the same. Rather oil is like coal. So oil trades off a BENCHMARK grade -- like Saudi Light or Brent (light) and then discounts are proffered as the crude is assayed to be heavier and more sour. (Iranian crude)
The Baku blend was MUCH MORE suitable for making aviation fuel. It didn't require as many refining steps to get what you needed. For the Nazis, that was ~91 octane.
In today's market Libyan crude and American fracked crude carry the highest price per barrel. Brent is right underneath them -- but because it's in the hub of European distribution, Brent is the benchmark.
Paris HAD modeled how many sorties the Luftwaffe could put up -- prior to the Pact. Because of internal politics, French air force fighters were not available in sufficient quantity, May 1940. Their Big Hope had just entered serious production -- about six-weeks back.
Paris HAD spent large on its air force -- without getting one. With each turn of government, the prior design was thrown out and a new contract let. This left France with the wealthiest design teams on the planet -- and little to show for their exertions.
Speer claimed that the Nazis were TAKING 50,000 tons per day of French steel. That's a tempo of 18,000,000 tons per year. Some of that steel came as a result of the French terms of surrender, back in 1940. That is, the steel was FREE to Hitler.
He was sucking dry France for just about everything he could think of -- and he had a great imagination for a thief.
Speer specifically called out his refusal to integrate war production with Italy.(!!!) It turns out that the industrialists disdained Italian anythings. The Krauts would not share even their obsolete Mark III tank blue prints. I believe that its armor plate manufacture was too touchy. The Nazis wouldn't even use Italian anythings in their supply chain.
1
-
1
-
I can see by the thread that everyone is getting wound up trying to defend their pet economic theories, or how to structure some idea society.
When it comes to the essence of Hard Left and Hard Right; the Hard Left is ALWAYS obsessed with destroying religion. The Hard Right is ALWAYS obsessed with fusing State and Religion. Islam fits that bill perfectly. Until the American Revolution, virtually EVERY nation on this planet fit that description; from Pharaoh to Henry VIII they fused king and religion.
The above reality overwhelms ALL economic notions.
Collectivism can be practiced from the Left or the Right. One can do it straight up... or do it indirectly. Virtually ALL current societies practice Collectivism in the INDIRECT manner -- via VAT taxes and Income taxes. With enough re-distribution, you end up in the exact same spot as if you've got full bore Socialism.
Government spending, as a percentage of the GDP, is through the roof across most of Europe. That's de facto Socialism. Benefits are sure to shower upon you as if you owned a slice of the economy, even though you don't hold any stock certificates.
Further, even nominally independent, capitalist firms, have to bow and scrape to government edicts at least as intrusive as anything the Nazis cooked up. And the Nazis stationed SS men all across the German economy. These fellas never get portrayed on film, so youngsters don't even have a CLUE as to how Nazi Germany functioned. This, even after TIK has tried to lay it out. It goes in one ear and out the other.
Further, I read posts indicating that Hitler privatized firms. WHAT? He was no Margaret Thatcher, not by a long shot. Hitler never privatized any firm. Quite the reverse was the case.
De facto, Hitler had State Sponsored Enterprises: firms that had free and easy access to loans. If you were attempting to build a coal - to - liquid fuels plant, your funding would be unlimited.
And as the USSR and Red China show even today, racial repression is COMMON for Socialist// Communist societies. It comes in so many different flavors. Even Chavez ran a racial discrimination program. That's why there was 100% employee turnover at his national oil company. It never recovered, of course. Ideology -- religion -- trumps economics.
1
-
The very terms Left and Right hail from the French Revolution, and how its politicians self-organized. The Right consisted of Monarchists who also believed in a state religion, Catholic, which would consecrate each succeeding King in a high ceremony. At the time, virtually EVERY nation had such a form of government, going back into the mists of time.
The Left was intensely anti-Monarchist and absolutely wanted to eliminate the state religion's connection to politics, if not crush it entirely.
By this standard, the budding USA was a Centrist polity. It has largely stayed that way in the centuries that followed.
At the end of WWII, the Soviets accepted into their ranks no end of minor Nazi officials. Neither party had any qualms, the new adherents fit right in.
The Modern Construction of the Nazis as Right Wing hails from the KGB and their Active Operations which started immediately after the war. No-one during WWII ever described the Nazis as Right Wing during the war. They were just Nazis. Calling them Right Wing would've smeared every conservative political voter in the country, USA, so it wasn't done.
The KGB couldn't even bare to call the Nazis, Nazis, so Fascist was used. But Hitlerism is not actually Fascism - which was an ITALIAN political movement. Allowing the KGB to determine the nomenclature of politics is just plain wrong. Most folks don't even realize that it was the KGB that placed the Nazis, their previous buddies, on the opposite end of the political spectrum -- and our Left bought that pitch hook line and sinker.
1
-
1
-
1