Comments by "OscarTang" (@oscartang4587u3) on "TIKhistory"
channel.
-
23
-
17
-
14
-
13
-
and Read the history of USSR, PRC, and Khmer Rouge, then you will discover Communist states and their leaders' ideology can still be regarded as Socialist States and Socialism despite they committed every single atrocity that Nazi commited.
In Mein Kampf Hitler also wanted to end class inequality too, he claimed that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf:
"(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such.
To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks.
.....
A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf)
On the other hand, while Clerical Socialism was religious, and Utopian Socialism predated the invention of class theory, Karl Marx still regarded them as Reactionary Socialisms in the Manifesto. (Socialist and Communist Literature, Manifesto of the Communist Party)
Karl Marx also saw Proudhon's Anarchism as Reactionary Socialism and essentially equal to Conservative Socialism, which "sought to depreciate every revolutionary movement in the eyes of the working class by showing that no mere political reform, but only a change in the material conditions of existence, in economical relations, could be of any advantage to them. By changes in the material conditions of existence, this form of Socialism, however, by no means understands abolition of the bourgeois relations of production, an abolition that can be affected only by a revolution, but administrative reforms, based on the continued existence of these relations; reforms, therefore, that in no respect affect the relations between capital and labour, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government." (2. Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism, III. Socialist and Communist Literature, Manifesto of the Communist Party)
By that definition, you don't need to be atheistic, using class theory, pro-working class, or aimming to abolish private property to be a Socialist.
Therefore, it is pretty impossible to ideologically exclude Nazism or fascism from Socialism while keeping both authoritarian Socialism ( like Marxist-Leninism and Maoism) and libertarian Socialism (like Anarchism and Democratic Socialism) within the Karl Marx's definition of Socialism.
Long Story Short, both ideologies were similar socialist ideologies; Nazism was based on race, and Communism was based on class.
While both did the same kinds of atrocities IRL, they were judged by different standards.
11
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
Regarding burning socialist book:
Socialists often burned other socialist’s book.
Books written by Fyodor Raskolnikov( an Old Bolshevik), Bukharin, Zinoviev, Trotsky, and other 651 authors were also banned and burn in USSR in Stalin Era. Others than those Communists Books, Anarchist Book by Bakunin was also deemed as “large poison grass” during Cultural Revolutions in PRC, once being discovered in the public, they would be destroyed imminently by burning or recycling as waste paper.
Other examples of socialist burning socialist book included Political comics made by left-wing German cartoonist George Grosz was burned by SPD Weimar Germany.
Regarding arresting leftist opposition:
More leftists were killed in the great Purge of the USSR and PRC than in Nazi Germany in peacetime (1933 to 1939).
USSR: According to the official record, at least 41,000 Red Army personnel were sentenced to death by Military Courts, and 10000 more Political prisoners (not ex-kulaks) were executed in the Gulag during the great purge.
PRC: Just in the Sufan movement of 1955-1957, which targeted the counter-revolutionary within the party and the government, 53,000 abnormal deaths.
Nazi German:
“Historians estimate the total of all those kept in the concentration camps in 1933 at around 100,000, and that does not count those picked up by the SA, beaten, kept for a time, and released without being formally charged. The estimates for these “wild” camps run to another 100,000.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p158. )
Out of those 200,000 prisoners, from various sources that can be found online, the highest number of German Communists (the left elements) executed/died in Concentration camps ranged from 20000 to 30000.
At the low end of the estimation, only 600 communists were killed in 1933. (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p158. )
“[Hitler] rejected from the outset the idea that the millions who voted for the KPD or the SPD could simply be “forbidden” [from the people’s community], and he was fully aware that the process of getting them integrated in the community could take years.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p163. )
“By July 1934, only around 4,700 prisoners remained, and a Hitler amnesty on August 7, 1934, cut the number to 2,394, 67 per cent of whom were in Bavaria.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p162. )
The rest of those 200,000 were released from the concentration camps.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
@JS-el3zm You are right, it just make the point Hilter is not Socislist because [they killed socialists in camp] invalid.
Other than the red terror of Lenin, Stalin also purged the Trotskyist “the socialist wing of the Bolshevik” too, did it disqualify both from being Socialist?
______________
Privatisation was a Nazi Scam.
Nazi renationalised all the state property that was previously sold to private sector as stock since 1933 with corporate law in 1937 by removing the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938)
Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.),
No one could fire, hire, or even change the wages of workers without the permission of DAF (Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p71-74. Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Chapter 2.).
The profit gained by the company would redistribution to the worker ( to further Nazi goal) by the DAF, the party subordinates or directly by the Nazi Government.
"A year or so ago I was ordered to spend social evenings with my 'followers' and to celebrate with them by providing free beer and sausages. The free beer and sausages were welcome enough ... Last year he (The Labor Front secretary) compelled me to spend over a hundred thousand marks for a new lunchroom in our factory. This year he wants me to build a new gymnasium and athletic field which will cost about 120,000 marks." (Reimann, The Vampire Economy, p. 112)
Nazi was not selling the property right of the company, they were just selling the administrative right, which they can take it back if they want, of the company.
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
1. USSR also had their welfare systems and instituted central planning. Just because most capitalist nations in the world implemented similar policies in the same period, it doesn’t make [created their welfare systems and instituted central planning] counter-prove anyone was running a Capitalist system.
2. What 2/3 are you talking about?
The Conservative voting base was quite consistent in the German federal election from 1930 to March 1933. The total seats of the Centre Party, DNVP and DVP in each election were 139, 134, 141 and 144, respectively.
3. What Hitler's electoral coalition are you talking about?
Hitler was appointed as Reichskanzler by Hindenburg not through any election.
4. Industrialists profiting in Nazi German?
Are you just making data up here? It seems very unlikely for industrialists and major business owners to make billions off from anything in Nazi Germany because "Through higher corporate tax rates, special war excess taxation, and by changing accounting rules, the Nazi regime substantially increased the tax burden for businesses, extracting up to 80% of the profits (see Banken 2018). At the same time, companies continued to pay the wealth tax. We estimate the corresponding wealth reduction to amount to 0.6% of net private wealth." (Wealth and its Distribution in Germany, 1895-2018, Thilo N. H. Albers, Charlotte Bartels, Moritz Schularick)
5. Regarding purging leftist opposition:
More leftists were killed in the great Purge of the USSR and PRC than in Nazi Germany in peacetime (1933 to 1939).
According to the official record, at least 41,000 Red Army personnel were sentenced to death by Military Courts, and 10000 more Political prisoners (not ex-kulaks) were executed in the Gulag during the great purge.
In PRC: In Sufan movement of 1955-1957 which targeted the counter revolutionary within the party and the government, 53,000 abnormal death.
While in Nazi German:
“Historians estimate the total of all those kept in the concentration camps in 1933 at around 100,000, and that does not count those picked up by the SA, beaten, kept for a time, and released without being formally charged. The estimates for these “wild” camps run to another 100,000.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p158. )
Out of those 200,000 prisoners, from various sources that can be found online, the highest number of German Communists (the left elements) executed/died in Concentration camps ranged from 20000 to 30000.
At the low end of the estimation, only 600 communists were killed in 1933. (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p158. )
“[Hitler] rejected from the outset the idea that the millions who voted for the KPD or the SPD could simply be “forbidden” [from the people’s community], and he was fully aware that the process of getting them integrated into the community could take years.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p163. )
“By July 1934, only around 4,700 prisoners remained, and a Hitler amnesty on August 7, 1934, cut the number to 2,394, 67 per cent of whom were in Bavaria.” (Gellately, R. “Hitler’s True Believers: How Ordinary People Became Nazis.” p162. )
The rest of those 200,000 were released from the concentration camps.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
[ Both were horrific, but the Nazis were interested especially in using them as a tool not merely of political control and intimidation against political opponents (or likely political opponents), but of social engineering to eliminate Jews and homosexuals and gypsies and "mental defectives" and other undesirables.]
Are you trying to whitewash the Atrocities committed by the Communist States, or are you just ignorant regarding the "Communism atrocities" you are trying to defend? Communists were also interested [especially in using them as a tool not merely of political control and intimidation against political opponents (or likely political opponents), but of social engineering to eliminate] the "Four Old Thing", "Five Black Categories", "Stinking Old Ninth" and other undesirables.
Would you kindly enlighten everyone here on what kind of [political opponents (or likely political opponents)] would be constituted by the people wearing glass and required to be eliminated in the Cambodian genocide?
[ In particular, I gave up on this one when you starting quoting another author who effectively accuses other historians, presumably ones who are well-thought of and regularly published and who get jobs] in universities, of being a bunch of dishonest left-wing anti-business no-goodniks who don't understand business and thus hate it, and that explains why their analysis is different from yours. That's a bogus way to justify your own disagreement with them. You can do better, so do better.]
Which [author who effectively accuses other historians? Without specifying it, you are, at best, Ad hominem, at worst, slandering.
[The Nazis were really about something else entirely, and the economic measures themselves were largely in service to tighten their own grip on society and on total power to pursue ends other than "socialism" or "capitalism" or any other particular economic organization. And it's these other objectives and aspects of their regime, especially their racism, as well as things like rabid jingoistic nationalism and militarism, that sort of brand the Nazis as right-wingers.]
Hitler wanted to create a nation of Aryan with all means of production centralised at the hand of the state, with great global influence. They are just the Soviet Union but racist instead of classist, current PRC with much stricter state control on economy, and the socialist Isreal from 1948 to 1977 with greater ambition.
8
-
8
-
8
-
@MochoStudiosYT
socialists would not be keen on burning marxist books as the nazis did---Stalin did burn the books from Trotsky
Socialists arent racist ---Holodomor against Ukrainian, Arab Socialism against Jews
nor do they have an idea of "racial superiority"--- Labor Zionism----The god chosen people.
Socialists don't consider one another as family---- Anarchism and Marxism also don't consider one another as family
Nazis also had a class system, and social class system, which socialism aims to abolish---so as Nazism.
In Mein Kampf Hitler claimed end class inequality is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf:
"(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such.
To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks.
.....
A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf)
Hitler did everything in his power to keep workers from unionizing, which socialism encurages.--- Not until the Communist raised to power.
“Today we can no longer confine ourselves to proclaiming the dictatorship of the proletariat. The trade unions have to be governmentalised; they have to be fused with state bodies. The work of building up large-scale industry has to be entrusted entirely to them. But all that is not enough. “(V. I. Lenin Report at the Second All-Russia Trade Union Congress January 20, 1919)
All Communist Countries nationalised their union, like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU.
Use the CTC of Cuba as an example.
Non of them have right to strike and collective bargaining. (Por Pedro Pablo Morejon, There Aren’t Any Real Unions in Cuba)
“There was no change in Cuba where the single trade union system persists, there is no genuine collective bargaining and the right to strike is not recognised in law. “ (2007 Annual Survey of violations of trade union rights - Cuba)
Those "socialists" were Lenin's enemies, and rivals. Lenin didnt jail them because they were socialists like the nazis did.-------They were, the whole revolutionary socialist, Syndicatist, and Anarchist factions were purged in USSR
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
You are describing communism with their own ideology, while describing fascism with the observation of an outsider. Every villain is the hero of their own story. Like Communist, Fascist would not used negative description to sell their ideologies.
Here is the Fascism in their own narrative illustrated in "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" by Prof Zeev Sternhell:
1/
The political aspect of Fascism originated from Sorelianism, while the economic aspect of Fascism originated from from Émile Janvion’s revolutionary syndicalist.
Sorelian belief or realized that the classless communist state was not achievable by class struggle as Marxism suggested because Marxism failed to account for/predict the following factors:
1. The bourgeoisie would avoid a fight, reduce its power, and purchase social tranquillity at any price.
2. Socialist parties would become instruments of class collaboration and concoct Democratic Socialism.
3. The elimination of bourgeoisies' appetites (the freedom of purchase) and the proletariats' ardor (the reward of production) would lead to the decadence of civilization (Production Inefficiency).
4. A state of affairs in which the official syndical organization became "a variety of politics, a means of getting on in the world" (the power of uniting proletarians would ascend the syndical leader social class from proletarian. Hence the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms can never be swept away)
5. The government and the philanthropists took it into their heads to exterminate socialism by developing social legislation and reducing employers' resistance to strikes."
6. Proletarian violence would come on the scene just at the moment when social tranquility tries to calm the conflicts.
(Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p66)
Hence, therefore, Sorelian had two conclusions.
The first is that capitalism failed to accomplish its social purpose and create a united, organized proletariat, conscious of its power and mission. (AKA Capitalism was not Self -Destructive in late 1800s to early 1900s) In order to achieve the "communistic revolution", Class Consciousness, Will to Struggle, and Social Polarization needed to be artificially created. (Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p66)
"class antagonisms were never automatically or necessarily produced by capitalism. Capitalism does not inevitably produce class struggle; a capitalist "inevitability" exists only in the domain of economics, production, and technology. If capitalism develops as the result of a certain necessity, if the capitalists all have to try and improve their equipment, to find new outlets, to reduce their manufacturing costs, "nothing obliges the workers to unite and to organize themselves." For this reason, capitalism can neither automatically cause social polarization and class antagonisms nor give rise to a combative way of thinking and a spirit of sacrifice. Class struggle materializes only where there is a desire, continually fostered, to destroy the existing order. The mechanisms of the capitalist system are able to give rise to economic progress, create ever-increasing wealth, and raise the standard of living. These mechanisms are a necessary but not sufficient precondition for nurturing a class consciousness. The capitalist system does not by its nature poduce a revolutionary state of mind…" ( Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p51-52)
The second one is that the classes would be the foundation of all socialism. The end goal of class struggle would be a free-market society in that different classes coexist in harmony with “an equality of expenses, efforts, and labor for all men, as well as an equality of profits and salaries.” ( Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p66, p147)
"In that case, "should one believe the Marxist conception is dead? Not at all, for proletarian violence comes on the scene just at the moment when social tranquillity tries to calm the conflicts. Proletarian violence encloses the employers in their role of producers and restores the structure of the classes just as the latter had seemed to mix together in a democratic quagmire." Sorel added that "the more the bourgeoisie will be ardently capitalist and the more the proletariat will be full of a fighting spirit and confident of its revolutionary force, the more will movement be assured." This was especially the case because he considered this division of classes to be "the basis of all socialism." This is what created "the idea of a catastrophic revolution" and would finally enable "socialism to fulfill its historical role." " (Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p66)
To archive this final goal, a Fascist Revolution will be required.
(Because of the need to include Mosley's Fascism, which did not use any myth to push his fascist revolution, into the definition, and even Communism IRL also used "antimaterialistic" and "antirationalistic" values like Cult of personality, social solidarity, the sense of duty and sacrifice, and heroic values to justify its final goal of the classless communist state, which was deemed as not purely scientific by Sorelian. I will skip the myth part.)
"The capitalist system does not by its nature produce a revolutionary state of mind, and it is not by itself capable of creating the conviction that the bourgeois order deserves to be overtaken not only by a "material catastrophe," but also by a "moral catastrophe." ( Prof Zeev Sternhell, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology", p52)
8
-
7
-
7
-
Saying public companies are not publicly owned is valid when you define “public” in “publicly owned” only as government and state, which we would usually do in daily life.
However, suppose you only define "public ownership" as government and state ownership when discussing Socialism. In that case, you are going to exclude Anarchism (not An-Cap) from Socialism, as the production units(cooperatives) of Anarchism are not owned nor controlled by the state/government ( not in the public sector).
Using the Anarchist Collective of Revolutionary Catalonia as an example.
"Michael Seidman observes that in contrast to the Soviet experience, many collectives were voluntary and bottom-up. However, there was also an element of coercion - the terror and upheaval encouraged reluctant individuals to obey radical authorities. In addition, it was not uncommon for collectives to effectively boycott non-members, compelling them to join unless they wished to face a great deal of struggle otherwise.
…
Seidman argues that while collectives may have encouraged solidarity internally, on a local scale they contributed towards organised selfishness. Collectives encouraged autarky and self-sufficiency, refusing to share with other collectives." (Seidman, Michael, "Agrarian Collectives during the Spanish Revolution and Civil War")
The "public" of the collective just means the members of the collective, not the state, everyone in Spain, or even everyone in that legislation area.
Under the same logic, the public in the publicly owned cooperation only means the owner of the shares of that cooperation, just like the "public" of the Anarchist Collective just means the members of that Collective.
7
-
@nickdipples8562
[I haven't defined "public" as "government". What are you talking about?]
That is your old argument. Don’t you remember?
[No, the apple is nit publicly owned, it is jointly (privately) owned. Public, in the sense of public ownership...]
[it's absolutely not publicly owned in the socialist sense, and it has nothing to do with "the public sector"...]
______________________________________________________________________
[Are you still claiming an anarchist workers' collective is the same as a privately owned company with private shareholders?]
They are different in many ways, but not in terms of the type of their ownership. Whether members actually work there or not would not change the fact that those collectives/cooperatives were collectively owned by those members.
Using Robert Owen New Lanark socialist experiment commune as an example. Regardless how the MOP was in the hand of the workers/members, the New Lanark would still be considered as private property of the members of the commune.
___________________________________________________
[And that Hitler wanted an end to inequality?!]
He did claim that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" in Mein Kampf:
"(6) By incorporating in the national community the masses of our people who are now in the international camp we do not thereby mean to renounce the principle that the interests of the various trades and professions must be safeguarded. Divergent interests in the various branches of labour and in the trades and professions are not the same as a division between the various classes, but rather a feature inherent in the economic situation. Vocational grouping does not clash in the least with the idea of a national community, for this means national unity in regard to all those problems that affect the life of the nation as such.
To incorporate in the national community, or simply the State, a stratum of the people which has now formed a social class the standing of the higher classes must not be lowered but that of the lower classes must be raised. The class which carries through this process is never the higher class but rather the lower one which is fighting for equality of rights. The bourgeoisie of to-day was not incorporated in the State through measures enacted by the feudal nobility but only through its own energy and a leadership that had sprung from its own ranks.
.....
A worker certainly does something which is contrary to the spirit of folk-community if he acts entirely on his own initiative and puts forward exaggerated demands without taking the common good into consideration or the maintenance of the national economic structure. But an industrialist also acts against the spirit of the folkcommunity if he adopts inhuman methods of exploitation and misuses the working forces of the nation to make millions unjustly for himself from the sweat of the workers. He has no right to call himself 'national' and no right to talk of a folk-community, for he is only an unscrupulous egoist who sows the seeds of social discontent and provokes a spirit of conflict which sooner or later must be injurious to the interests of the country."(Mein Kampf)
7
-
@nickdipples8562
[Where did I define "public" as "government"? ]
You never directly define what public mean in the previous comments (AFAIK), but you surely associated the meaning of those two concept together.
[it's absolutely not publicly owned in the socialist sense, and it has nothing to do with "the public sector"...]
"The public sector, also called the state sector, is the part of the economy composed of both public services and state-owned enterprise." (wiki)
_____________________________
[Let alone make the argument that state ownership is the only form of socialism.]
I never said that you make such argument. I stated if you equalise "public" with "public(state/government) sector", all other social ownership of MOP would be classified as private ownership of MOP. Thus, by defining “public” as “government” and “state” as we would typically do, you will exclude any kind of socialism but the statist one from the definition of socialism.
"However, suppose you only define "public ownership" as government and state ownership when discussing Socialism. In that case, you are going to exclude Anarchism (not An-Cap) from Socialism, as the production units(cooperatives) of Anarchism are not owned nor controlled by the state/government ( not in the public sector). "
"As regardless it is collective ownership, group ownership, worker ownership, or social ownership of MOP, they will all fall into the definition of private ownership of MOP if we are using the definition that public is only equal to “government” or “state”."
“by defining “public” as “government” and “state” as we would typically do, you will exclude any kind of socialism but the statist one from the definition of socialism.”
______________________________
[Rest of your nonsense binned unread, given there is no sensible argument that can equate a worker owned cooperative with a private company owned by investors]
Again there are many difference between the investers owned cooperation and workers owned cooperative, but not in term of ownership.
7
-
7
-
1. and 4.So as Stalin and Lenin and Mao. All are just removing competitors, like Muslim and Crusader killing each other didn’t make them both became atheists.
2. They controlled those large businesses first by filled the executive brench of firms with Nazi ( 3:53 ). Expropriation if against the Nation or party orders. (4:20, 20:55) Implemented regulations including fixed wages and employment of workers (17:15, 17:31) by the DAF, and the centralized distribution of raw material and goods with price control even before the war started (11:27). Most of the taxes were levied against the rich, the corporations, and foreigners like the Jews. They weren’t levied against the poor, who had their food, rent, clothing, and recreational activities (plus others) subsidised by the State. (10:15)
3. Nazi scammed the buyer who brought the “privatised assets” with corporate law in 1937 by removing the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors (Mertens, 2007: 95-96). Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders (Mertens, 2007: 101).” (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938)
5. So did the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party of Germany calling each other “Social Fascist” and “Red Fascist”, aka late stage capitalist under Communist definition. Does it make both parties not an socialist party?
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Hitler lied to be a capitalist in his speech to ease the social tension caused by his Socialist policies that were listed out in this video.
Here are some examples where Hitler lied in his speeches
[“You see, the great mass of workers only wants bread and circuses. Ideas are not accessible to them and we cannot hope to win them over. We attach ourselves to the fringe, the race of lords, which did not grow through a miserabilist doctrine and knows by the virtue of its own character that it is called to rule, and rule without weakness over the masses of beings.” Hitler 1930]
He lied, as he increase the social welfare to the workers, banned private firing and fixed the wage of the workers, and minimise the unemployment rate to 1-2% after he rose to power in 1933.
Private property rights, as enshrined by articles 115 and 153 of the Weimar Constitution, were abolished in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. (Text of the Reichstag Fire Decree, 28 Feb 1933. Text of the Weimar Constitution.)
As Götz Aly’s book “Hitler’s Beneficiaries” makes clear, most of the taxes were levied against the rich, the corporations, and foreigners like the Jews. They weren’t levied against the poor, who had their food, rend, clothing, and recreational activities (plus others) subsidized by the State. ( Aly, “Hitler’s Beneficiaries,” see Chapter 2.)
“Family and child tax credits, marriage loans, and home-furnishing and child-education allowances were among the measures with which the state tried to relieve the financial burden on parents and encourage Germans to have more children.” (Aly, “Hitler’s Beneficiaries,” p38-39.)
In addition to this, there were price controls, wage controls, rent controls, and centralised distribution of goods - materials could only be bought with certificates which had to be obtained from one of the various central planning boards which distributed said materials.( Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p51-52, p67-70, p251-254.)
Worker pay may have shrank in nominal terms, but in actual real terms, it definitely went up, thanks to wage and price controls, rent controls, subsidies on food, rent, coal, insurance policies and more besides.(Aly, "Hitler’s Beneficiaries," p36, p62, p71. Neumann, “Behemoth,” p306. Overy, “Nazi Economic Recovery,” p31. Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p71.)
The ‘Labour Book’ that the German workers had did prevent them from just swapping jobs, but it also stopped employers from hiring people they liked. Remember, a socialist economy is centrally planned, so the central planners dictate where you go and what you do. The fact that the workers were centrally planned is proof that the economy was “rationally regulated” - a central tenet of socialism. ( “The Vampire Economy,” p109. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327.)
___________________________________________________________________________
[“The head of the enterprise is dependent on his workforce, the willingness of his workers to participate in a common effort. If they strike, his property is worthless. On the other hand, by what right could they claim a part of this property, even to participate in decisions? Mister Amann, would you accept it if your stenographers suddenly wanted to take part in your decisions? The employer is responsible for production, and assures the workers their subsistence. Our great heads of industry are not concerned with the accumulation of wealth and the good life, rather they are concerned with responsibility and power. They have acquired this right by natural selection: they are members of the higher race. But you would surround them with a council of incompetents, who have no notion of anything. No economicv leader can accept that.” Hitler 1932]
He lied as he abolished the private property rights, which enshrined by articles 115 and 153 of the Weimar Constitution, in the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. (Text of the Reichstag Fire Decree, 28 Feb 1933. Text of the Weimar Constitution.)
The industries and businesses were nationalised.
(Bel, "Against the mainstream," PDF p3 + p9. Mierzejewski, “The Most Valuable Asset of the Reich,” p4. Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Chapter 2. Temin, “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s,” p576-577. Tooze, "Wages of Destruction," p111-113.)
The people who ran the industries were NS.
(Bel, "Against the mainstream," PDF p3 + p9. Jeffreys, “Hell’s Cartel,” Kindle Chapter 9. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p124.)
And heavy social regulations were imposed on every industry, including regulations on the hiring and firing of workers, working hours, work habits, accidents, wages, vacation time, etc.
(Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Chapter 2.)
If the “leaders” refused to cooperate, the factories that they supposedly owned were taken off them. Professor Junker of the Junkers aeroplane factory was the first to be thrown out of his own business as a result, but he wasn’t the only one.
(Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Kindle Chapter 2. Temin, “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s,” p576-577. Tooze, "Wages of Destruction," p111-113.)
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7