Comments by "OscarTang" (@oscartang4587u3) on "TIKhistory"
channel.
-
@jamescareyyatesIII
[The NAZIS wanted to appeal to labor, who they ultimately never supported.]
The “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the 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)
Workers had their food, rend, clothing, and recreational activities (plus others) subsidized by the State. ( Aly, “Hitler’s Beneficiaries,” see Chapter 2.)
[You can't give me one instance where the NAZIS or Hitler ever overuled big business.]
How about, the natioanalisation of the private cooperations owned by Heinrich Lübbe, Professor Junker, and Fritz Thyssen ?
3
-
@Schnoz42069
Just because you claim he claimed he was not a socialist, doesn't mean he wasn't actually a socialist.
The definition of Socialism is an ideology that advocated “Social Ownership of means of production”, which appropriate the surplus product, produced by the means of production or the wealth that comes from it, to society at large or the workers themselves. ("Theory and Practice in Socialist Economics")
By the fact that the surplus product produced by means production, and the wealth derived from it, were appropriated to society as a whole by a the State and to workers by DAF. This make Nazi economic system met the description of two principal variants of social ownership of the mean of production according to the following source.
"Here again there are two principal variants of such social claims to income, depending on the nature of the community holding the claim: (1) Public surplus appropriation: the surplus of the enterprise is distributed to an agency of the government (at the national, regional, or local level), representing a corresponding community of citizens. (2) Worker surplus appropriation: the surplus of the enterprise is distributed to enterprise workers." (Toward a Socialism for the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past, by Weisskopf, Thomas E. 1992. Review of Radical Political Economics, Vol. 24, No. 3–4, p. 10)
Historical fact show that Nazi Germany gradually eliminate unemployment, 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.)
Historical fact also indicated that DAF in real live was not pro-capitalist as the Nazi in your own imagination. Capitalists were also being regulated by the DAF. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system.
(Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.)
“Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager...
(Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.)
I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory...
(Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.)
There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ”
( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.)
Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the 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)
3
-
3
-
@hobbso8508 Then why did you claim NAZI Germany was capitalist "Socialism is a different economic system to capitalism, and therefore is always opposed to it." You just again contradicted yourself.
Even under Marxism, no the public cannot decide how the money is spent, only the proletariat can. With Karl Marx own words in the Communist Manifasto "When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has
been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another."
There will be no politics anymore, chance no need for democracy anymore, everyone would be from each according to his ability to each according to his need and live forever happy ever after.
Before the state transform from Socialist state to Communist State, "Democracy would be wholly valueless to the proletariat if it were not immediately used as a
means for putting through measures directed against private property and ensuring the livelihood
of the proletariat. "
And in Lenin in State and Revolution: "
In capitalist society, under the conditions most favorable to its development, we have more or less complete democracy in the democratic republic. But this democracy is always bound by the narrow framework of capitalist exploitation and consequently always remains, in reality, a democracy for the minority, only for the possessing classes, only for the rich. Freedom in capitalist society always remains just about the same as it was in the ancient Greek republics: freedom for the slave-owners... ...break the resistance of the capitalist exploiters.”
So in either Marxist's Socialist State or Communist State, there should be no Democracy.
If it is nessary for Socialism to include modern wastern democracy, you excluded Marxism from your definition of socialism.
3
-
@hobbso8508 If fail, Violent Revolutions would be an acceptable substitute.
"If the proletariat, during its contest with the bourgeoisie, is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class. "
3
-
The idea of ,the state is society, is not from Stalin nor Mao but Karl Marx and Frederick Engels.
“Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain.”(Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith)
“
…These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
…
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
…
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c." (Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848)
“Whilst the capitalist mode of production more and more completely transforms the great majority of the population into proletarians, it creates the power which, under penalty of its own destruction, is forced to accomplish this revolution. Whilst it forces on more and more the transformation of the vast means of production, already socialised, into state property, it shows itself the way to accomplishing this revolution. The proletariat seizes political power and turns the means of production in the first instance into state property. ” (Anti-Dühring, Frederick Engels)
3
-
3
-
Because South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and France during Les Trente Glorieuses didn't implement price control or natioanlise the private sectors when the economy were recovering.
It is National Socialism, they will surely exploit everything outside of its race and nation, like communist exploit ex-bourgeoisie and their property.
["But the idea of Socialism does not say that the State cannot make a profit when it controls the economy" ] TIK never said that in the video.
As shown in other quote from the same book and othersources provided in the video. 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)
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.)
So, under the definition of socialism TIK used: the social ownership of the means of production (hence the word “social-ism”). The idea is that society will be centrally organised, that private property will be abolished and transferred to ‘social’ control, 80 and that “socialised man [will] rationally regulate their interchange with Nature” (in other words - they will plan the economy rather than leave it to the free market). Despite Hitler failed to implement “full socialism” in the Third Reich like Stalin in USSR, just by showing Hitler attempted to centrally organise the economy, attempted to abolish private property, attempted to transfer all property into ‘social’ control, and attempted to regulate the economy is already enough to prove that Hitler was a Socialist, and the National Socialism he created was Socialism.
3
-
@confusedarmchairphilosopher
Average Worker real wage has been gradually increase from 88.5 at 1933 to 107.5 at 1938 (Table 7.2.1 “The Longman Companion to Nazi Germany”).
PS: lowest in 1932.
Privatisation was a Nazi Scam.
Nazi renationalised all the state property that was previously sold to private sector as stock listed in Against the Mainstream 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)
Regarding private bank
1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks(Bel, “Against the Mainstream,” P20.),
That Nazi’s Bank Act allowed the Government to "intervene actively in banking business as and when they think fit and even to select the personnel of bank management".(Dessauer, Marie. 1935. "The German Bank Act of 1934.", p.224)
Even if banks were privately owned in the forefront, they were still under the control of the Nazi party.
Regarding Trade Union and labour strike
Historically, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade union—nationalisation as an Organ of the State. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions.
“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)
Use the CTC of Cuba as an example.
None of them have the 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)
But unlike the Nationalised trade union in Communist State, DAF did have great power in Nazi Germany. It is the organisation enforcing forced profit redistribution, fixed wage and fix employment.
3
-
@purrdiggle1470 Historical fact indicated that DAF in real live was also not pro-capitalist as the Nazi in your own imagination. The "capitalists" were also people being regulated by the DAF. Under the new National Socialist regulations (enforced by the DAF), the concepts of “employers” and “employees” were done away with, being replaced with the terms “leaders” and “followers”. And while some “followers” did complain about the new system, saying it was benefiting the “leaders” at the expense of the “followers”, their “leaders” also complained about the new system.
(Evans, “The Third Reich in Power,” p107. Lindner, "Inside IG Farben,” p70, p83. Shirer, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p327-329.)
“Yes, I am the ‘leader’ in my factory; my workers are my ‘followers.’ But I am no longer a manager...
(Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p107.)
I cannot decide what is allowed or forbidden in my own factory...
(Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.)
There have been cases where managers were removed by the Party of Labor Trustees and replaced by ‘kommissars.’ ”
( Herr A. Z. quoted from Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p116.)
Furthermore, the “private profit” of those private companies would still be forced to redistribute among the workers ( to further the 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)
3
-
3
-
@bananabourbonaenima He lied to in his speech to ease the social tension caused by his Socialist policies.
Here are some more examples where he 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.)
__________
[“If you seized power in Germany tomorrow what would you immediately do with the Krupp firm? Regarding the shareholders, the workers, the property, the benefits, and the direction, would you keep things as they are?”
H: “Of course. Do you think I’m stupid enough to destroy the economy? The state will only intervene if people do not act in the interest of the nation. There is no need for dispossession or participation in all the decisions. The state will intervene strongly when it must, pushed by superior motives, without regards to particular interests.”] (Hitler 1932)
He lied as he had intervened strongly even before people did not act in the interest of the nation. Nazi 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. (Mierzejewski, “The Most Valuable Asset of the Reich,”. Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Chapter 2. Temin, “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s,” p576-577.)
The people running the industries were replaced with or forced to joined the Nazi. (Jeffreys, “Hell’s Cartel,” Kindle Chapter 9. Lindner,)
If the “leaders” refused to join the Nazi Party or cooperate, the factories that they supposedly owned were taken off them. Heinrich Lübbe, Hugo Junkers, and Fritz Thyssen were thrown out from their own business because they refused to join or cooperate. (Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” Kindle Chapter 2. Temin, “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s,” p576-577. Tooze, "Wages of Destruction," p111-113.)
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.)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Azazin187
I am not the one who suggesting conservative Socialism/Bourgeois Socialism is Socialism, again it was from Communist Manifesto.
As in 40:28 suggest, “Robert Gellately has recently published a book called “Hitler’s True Believers” which strongly argues that historians have completely ignored the socialism inherent with National Socialism. Beside, saying academic accepted view is just Argumentum ad populum. If this view is so wrong, why don’t you just debunked it easily just like debunking Holocaust Denier.”
Arab socialism is another socialism that use ethno-nationality as the socialised entity.
I totally accepted your counter-argument, Nazi German did indeed have loosen control over the industry when compared to Soviet Union in 1930s, but Communist States since 1970 also start adopting loosen control (capitalism characteristic, allowing competition) over production unit to increase their initiative.
Meanwhile, Buchheim didn’t dismiss the Nazi abolishment of private ownership right with the 1933 Reichstag Fire Decree, and removal of the shareholders “right to vote on dividend policy and on the dismissal of directors. Moreover, the government was empowered to dissolve any corporation deemed to endanger the national welfare without the need to compensate shareholders” with 1937 Corporate Law. (THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN STOCK MARKET, 1870-1938) He also didn’t disprove the function of DAF in Nazi Germany.
Social darwinism is just the justification for the superiority of the Aryan, they are promoting equality within their race and no mercy agains other races. Just like communist would promote equality within politician, while no mercy against the bourgeoisie and other classes. If Nazism is really about Social Darwinism why "Profit, as Point 14 of the Nazi' Twenty-Five Points', declared in 1920, was to be shared out among the community.”; and why, workers had fixed wages, firms could not fire their workers and heavily subsidised by the state (17:15, 17:31). In the mean time Nazi Germany had reduced the unemployment rate to less than a 3% since 1934.
3
-
@Azazin187 Bismarck’s State Socialism exactly fit the description of Bourgeoisie Socialism in the Communist Manifesto:
“A second, and more practical, but less systematic, form of this Socialism 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 economic 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 labor, but, at best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government.”
Bismarck’s State Socialism still fit into the definition of Bourgeoisie Socialism in the Communist Manifesto regardless of how conservative Bismarck himself actually was.
I acknowledge that entrepreneur in Nazi Germany had their restricted freedom to make their own business decisions, but so as all Communist Countries after the 1970s. Every currently existing Communist State, including Cuba and North Korea, has abandoned the old direct-controlled economy.
TIK never claimed that Nazi German was a full Socialism State from 36:18. TIK claimed that Nazism is a socialist ideology, with the proof that Hitler attempted to centrally organize the economy in 26:29. (As Hitler’s action aimed to serve its socialized entity, the race 32:44 instead of maximizing profit, the ideology can still consider as Socialism instead of state Capitalism.)
If the Soviet Union and PRC, after 1980, and Cube and Vietnam, after 2000, were/are still considered as Socialist States, Nazi Germany should still be counted as a Socialist State.
On the other hand, you are the one who neglected the economic relationship between the workers, the State, and the industrialists.
That statement is true; the definition of Socialism is enunciation. Your definition of Socialism was different from Karl Marx’s definition of Socialism.
Similar to Communism in practice, equality is not for those with different ideologies.
Private property is a legal designation for the ownership of property by non-governmental legal entities. As the Nazis suspended the Articles that guaranteed the property right, Private property didn’t exist de jure. The property seized by Professor Junker and Fritz Thyssen proved that the right to property of Aryan was also not guaranteed.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@funnyyellowdog8833
[the NSDAP was not fighting any class war]
The general definition of Socialism is just social ownership of the mean of production, which includes the ideology like Clerical Socialism, Utopian Socialism, Syndicalism, Anarchism, and Anaro-Syndicalism. The socialized entity can be race (Arab Socialism, Labor Zionism), class (Marxism, Social Democrat), or even Religion (Islamic Socialism, Clerical Socialism). While Socialist Ideologies like Arab Socialism and Social Democrat don't aim to abolish private ownership of the means of production, they are still regarded as Socialism.
Even if your definition of is not based on any reference it is quite impossible to ideologically exclude fascism or Nazism from Socialism without excluding either authoritarian Socialism ( like Marxist-Leninism and Maoism), libertarian Socialism (like Anarchism and Democratic Socialism) or non pure class based Socialism (Arabic Socialism, Maoism and Labor Zionism) from the definition of Socialism, as fascism or Nazism are just authoritarian, free market tolerating (liberal socialism) , and non pure class based Socialism.
———————————
Beside, Hitler ruined Nazi Germany's economy and failed to achieve autarky with his planned economy that allocated more portion of national resources to the workers. Hitler still went for eliminating a significant amount of valuable human resources because of their race during a losing war.
Even using your narrative, under what definition of pragmatism can you describe a person whose most significant decisions worked against his own goal for most of the time as a pragmatist?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Nazism can be defined as a socialist ideology because:
1. Hitler wanted to end class inequality too, he claimed that is one of the "obligations on our shoulders" stated in Mein Kampf.
2.Hitler attempted to organize the economy (26:29) centrally and increase the social welfare (11:27), workers had fixed wages, “private sector” could not fire or hire workers without the permission of DAF, and heavily subsidized by the State (17:15, 17:31), and most of those “private sector” were controlled by Nazi member.
3.Hitler’s action aimed to serve its socialized entity, the race (32:44), instead of industrializing Russia demonstrates, clearly rejected the practice of capital export, which was characteristic for the phase of state (monopoly) capitalism (37:47).
4.Hitler want to solve the solve his “Shrinking Market Problem” through agriculturalise the Lebensraum, to create a constants regulated supply and demand between the Reich for the industrial products and Lebensraum for the agricultural products (34:48)
________________________
5.Regarding Nationalised Trade Union:
Historically Nazi, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade Union——Nationalisation. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF, like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions.
Ideologically, Lenin said
“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)
In real life, 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)
______________________
6.Regarding arresting leftist opposition:
More leftists were killed in the great Purge of USSR and PRC than that Nazi Germany in peace time (1933 to 1939).
According to the official record, at least 41,000 Red Army personal were sentenced to death by Military Courts and 10000 more Political prisoners (not ex-kulaks) were executions 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 can be found online, the highest number of German Communist (the left elements) executed/died in Concentration Camp was ranged from 20000 to 30000.
In 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 percent 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.
_______________________
7.Regarding Racial and National Socialism/Communism
Socialism can cooberate with conservative nationalism and racism as proven by the history and the ideology of Arab socialism and Labor Zionism. They are both ethos-centric, leftist and considered as Socialism, while both want to cleanse the other side from the same holy land.
Even Communist States in real life cooperated Nationalism with their Marxist Leninism. Milovan Đilas, who popularised the term "national communism" in his New Class (1957), wrote: "No single form of communism ... exists in any other way than as national communism. In order to maintain itself it must become national."
3
-
@Bengully
“Hitler wanted to end inequality” is from Mein Kampf, his own words. That is not a conspiracy theory at all. Marxism also wants to end inequality, but in practice, it just makes itself into a new ruling class. Sincere or not is not the question as long as its ideology claims to want to do it. Otherwise, every Marxist Leninism would also be refuted by its actual practice.
____________________________
At least I provide sources to support my "conspiracy theory",
Regarding your Hitler 1923 narrative, can you quote the Hitler interview from the Chicago Tribune that claimed he would like to send shock troops to Chicago to assist in the campaign?
_______________________
Regarding Ford
According to “The Ford Motor Company and The Third Reich”, Fordwerke was under the direct control of the Nazi government:
“Who was in charge of Fordwerke when it used slave labor (it is now generally accepted that this occurred between 1941 and 1945)? By the time that slave labor was introduced, Fordwerke was clearly under the direct control of the Nazi government, though administered through the company headquarters in Cologne (albeit by Robert Schmidt).”
Regarding General Motors
GM was just the Mother Company and financier of Adam Opel (acquired in 1929, and its supervisory board chairman Wilhelm von Opel was an SS). GM's only collusion with Nazi Germany was just to help ease their foreign currency crisis. They had no direct control over any production of anything in Nazi Germany. (Nazi Economy and U.S. Big Businesses (2)—The Case of General Motors Corporation)
Regarding other banks and firms. They didn’t “collaborate” with Hitler unconditionally. They profited from it, just like Toshiba and Metropolitan-Vickers profited from having business with the USSR in 1987 and 1933, respectively.
Secondly, not only did Foreign Capitalist “collaborate” with Nazis, Soviet Union also “collaborate” with Nazi Germany with 1,600,000 tons of grains, 900,000 tons of oil, 200,000 tons of cotton, 140,000 tons of manganese, 200,000 tons of phosphates, 20,000 tons of chrome ore, 18,000 tons of rubber 100,000 tons of soybeans, 500,000 tons of iron ores, 300,000 tons of scrap metal and pig iron, 2,000 kilograms of platinum though German-Soviet Credit Agreement (1939).
At the same time, Nazis entailed Soviet obligations to deliver 180 million Reichsmarks in raw materials and German commitment to provide the Soviets with 120 million Reichsmarks of German industrial goods.
Fascist Italy also provided the USSR with the ship design blueprint of the Kirov-class cruiser and even helped them build the destroyer Tashkent.
If Hilter can be classified as a Capitalist just because American capitalism “collaborated” with him, would it also make Hitler a Communist because the USSR also “collaborated” with him?
How about those Soviet communists? They also “collaborated” with Nazi German, and Fascist Italy, not to mention the support of lend-lease from the Capitalist USA during WWII.
The other case would be Cuba. It is currently actively seeking investment from foreign capitalist companies. Does it make them not practising Socialism?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Can you elaborate on what FPÖ did to make them far right?
As I cannot found any from wiki
"The first FPÖ party leader was Anton Reinthaller, a former Nazi Minister of Agriculture and SS officer.[30] He had been asked by ÖVP Chancellor Julius Raab to take over the movement rather than let it be led by a more socialist-leaning group.[15] While the majority of former Nazis had probably joined the two main parties in absolute numbers, they formed a greater percentage of FPÖ members due to the party's small size.[15] Nevertheless, none of them were real revolutionaries and they pursued pragmatic, non-ideological policies, and the FPÖ presented itself as a moderate party.[15] The FPÖ served as a vehicle for them to integrate in the Second Republic; the party was a welcome partner with both the SPÖ and ÖVP in regional and local politics, although it was excluded at the national level.[15][31] The ÖVP and the FPÖ ran a joint candidate for the 1957 presidential election, who lost.[15]
Reinthaller was replaced as leader in 1958 by Friedrich Peter (also a former SS officer), who led the party through the 1960s and 1970s and moved it towards the political centre.[4] In 1966 the ÖVP-SPÖ Grand Coalition which had governed Austria since the war was broken, was put to an end, when the ÖVP gained enough votes to govern alone. SPÖ leader Bruno Kreisky (himself a Jew) defended Peter's past and initiated a political relationship—and a personal friendship—with Peter; in 1970 the FPÖ was, for the first time, able to tolerate an SPÖ minority government.[15][32] In 1967 the more extreme faction in the FPÖ broke away and established the National Democratic Party, seen by some observers as a final shedding of the party's Nazi legacy.[33]"
National Democratic Party , the "broke away far-right faction", just advocated the Anschluss of Austria into Germany (the SPD also want to do that during Weimar Republic) and the re-introduction of the death penalty. It also agitated against "superalienation" and "infiltration" by foreign workers (Gastarbeiter). Those policies were not liberalistic at all.
3
-
The general definition of Socialism is just social ownership of the mean of production, which includes the ideology of those "so-called socialists" like Clerical Socialism, Utopian Socialism, Syndicalism, Anarchism, and Anaro-Syndicalism. The socialized entity can be race (Arab Socialism, Labor Zionism), class (Marxism, Social Democrat), or even Religion (Islamic Socialism, Clerical Socialism). While Socialist Ideologies like Arab Socialism and Social Democrat don't aim to abolish private ownership of the means of production, they are still regarded as Socialism.
The definition of socialism can be different for everyone, if it is not based on any reference. However, it is quite impossible to ideologically exclude fascism or Nazism from Socialism without excluding either authoritarian Socialism ( like Marxist-Leninism and Maoism), libertarian Socialism (like Anarchism and Democratic Socialism) or non pure class based Socialism (Arabic Socialism, Maoism and Labor Zionism) from the definition of Socialism, as fascism or Nazism are just authoritarian, free market tolerating (liberal socialism) , and non pure class based Socialism.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@nickdipples8562
The definition of Socialism used here is "Soical (including State which Marxism advocated) ownership (even as limited as modern Social Democrat) of mean of production".
———————————————————
The "Private Sector"
Private property rights (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.)
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.)
Every bank and firms were legally put under the Nazi Control though the Corporate Law in 1937 and Bank Act of 1934.
________________________________________________________________
The Workers
The following references illustrate how Nazi practicing their Social ownership by appropriating "the surplus product, produced by the means of production, or the wealth that comes from it, to society as a whole". (Wiki-Social ownership).
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.)
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)
No one could fire, hire, or even change the wages of workers without the permission of DAF with the control of "Labour Book". ( Reimann, “The Vampire Economy,” p109.).
___________________________________________________________________
The Markets
The only buyer and seller was also the State, as there is no real free market in the economic system in practice as well as in theory, as stated in the CHARACTERIZING THE NAZI ECONOMIC SYSTEM chapter in the "The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry."
"The ideal Nazi economy would liberate the creativeness of a multitude of private entrepreneurs in a predominantly competitive framework gently directed by the State to achieve the highest welfare of the Germanic people.
This "directed market economy," as it was called, had not yet been introduced because of the war. Therefore, a way to characterize the actual German economy of the Third Reich more realistically would probably be "state-directed private ownership economy" instead of using the term "market." But that means neither that the specific measures taken by the State were really helpful in the war effort, nor that "markets" played no role in the actions of enterprises" (BUCHHEIM, CHRISTOPH & SCHERNER, JONAS. (2006). The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry.)
The firms can't cut costs for the workers by firing them or reducing their salaries. Even when the firm went bankrupt or was forcefully changed hand by the Nazi, as again private property right was abolished, the State could do whatever was necessary to remove the weak firm. The workers would still have their jobs and wage. The only parts of society with competition were between the firms.
What Buchheims described here that the Nazis constantly regulated/directed the market to induce firms to act accordingly. According to Das Kapital V3, what the Nazis did was the socialist way to run a society.
"Freedom in this field can only consist in socialized man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; and achieving this with the least expenditure of energy and under conditions most favorable to, and worthy of, their human nature." (“Das Kapital v3,” p593.)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@hobbso8508
I used the proper term, even with your own narrative, 5 months ago, you said:
"Marx on the other hand drew a strong distinction between private property (capitalist owned businesses) and personal property. "
[ @oscartang4587u3 It's not my fault you choose lie about the democracy index. It measures democracy, plain and simple. Here:
"The Democracy Index is an index measuring democracy"
See.
Nope. They do not have universal suffrage because universal suffrage isn't just voting, it is voting to decide the governance of the nation. When you don't have a choice it's not a decision, therefore not universal suffrage, by definition.
I never said anything about my personal views. Marx on the other hand drew a strong distinction between private property (capitalist owned businesses) and personal property. And no, changing how businesses work would not negatively effect civil liberties, in the same way that banning businesses from wage theft and pollution are not negative factors on civil liberties.
Yes, under your imaginary definition, not under any definition used by literally anyone else. Democracy is a system of government by the whole population, end of story.
Hang on, while we give you another 20 yards.]
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
TIK never claimed that Nazi German was a full Socialism State 36:18. TIK claimed that Nazism is a socialist ideology, with the proof of Hitler attempted to centrally organize the economy in 26:29. As Hitler’s action aimed to serve its socialized entity, the race 32:44 instead of maximizing profit, his ideology was still Socialism instead of State Capitalism.
Private Property right was abolished in 1933. 3:00
German Bank Act of 1934 allowed the government to exercise tight control over private banks.
Nazi Firms were owned by the state, and co-controlled by the "leader" ex-owner of the firms or newly assigned administrators, and the Daf, which represented the followers. 8:50 Even if there is exploitation, the workers were exploitated for the state and for the people, not for the "leader" of the factory.
Nazi also implement 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).
For the real socialism, Soviet permitted household plots since it foundation, Kosygin reform from 1965 to 1970, permission of private garden markets since 1971. In 1972, “The small plots, for example, account for one‐half of all the potatoes and vegetables produced in the Soviet Union, Of the nation's 41 million cows; 16 million are privately owned.” (Soviet Promoting Private Farm Markets, Theodore Shabad)
If that ratio can still be consider as “little to no private property”, I believe Nazi Germany can also fit that criteria and be classified as “Real Socialist”State under the same standard.
3
-
3
-
Sadly, those refutative critiques you stated can also be commonly found in the Communist States in real life.
If you can refute Hitler and his ideology from socialism just by all those things you mentioned, Lenin and his Marxist-Leninism would also not be socialism.
Regarding Nationalised Trade Union:
Historically Nazi, Fascists and Communist Regime had the same approach toward trade Union——Nationalisation. Nazi nationalised all Labor Union into DAF like Cuba nationalised all Union into CTC, USSR to ACCTU, and Italy to Fascist Trade Unions.
Ideologically, Lenin said
“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)
In real life, use the CTC of Cuba as an example.
None of them have the 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)
__________________
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 can be found online, the highest number of German Communist (the left elements) executed/died in Concentration Camp was 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 percent 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.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Regarding Fascism Part 1
It is not the pinochle of Capitalism, it is not a social phenomenon. It is an(theoretically) egalitarian ideology evolved from Marxist Class Socialism.
Despite scattered, "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" also illustrated the Socialism origin of Fascist economic and political ideologies
The political aspect of Fascism originated from 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)
3
-
3