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

  1. Conservatism is not even the opposite of Liberalism... that would be progressivism. Typical american mistake.
    40
  2. Wrong. There is nothing contradictory about it. Anarchism is a form of governance. Capitalism is an economic system. There is no conflict there.
    5
  3. There is no such thing as "authoritarian capitalism" and is an oxymoron... also Fascism was a socialist ideology.
    4
  4. Wrong. Neo-Nazis are still socialists and on the far-left.
    4
  5. "but Nazism is mainly capitalism" Wrong. It was a form of socialism and strictly anti-capitalist.
    3
  6.  @turkx6  : Wrong. By definition it was. You cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    3
  7. "It really doesn't mean anything since they were extremly right wing." Wrong. They were totalitarian far-left socialists. Extreme right wing would be Anarcho-Capitalism.
    2
  8. Wrong. "Authoritarian capitalism" is an oxymoron, and the USA has a mixed economy system.
    2
  9. "is a very far right extremist group, " Wrong. National Socialism was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology which rejected both marxism and capitalism. Extreme right would be Anarcho-Capitalism.
    2
  10.  @m.r4841  "and is neither social nor socialist" Wrong. National Socialism was a socialist ideology.
    2
  11.  @5267w  "if you look at nazism and fascism both are culturally far-right and economically centrist which makes them right wing" Wrong. Both Nazism and Fascism were totalitarian far-left, socialist ideologies... where the former was based on ethnonationalism while the latter was based on national syndicalism which they adapted from Georges Sorel. Neither had anything to do with right wing of any kind. They were to the right from marxism rather.
    2
  12.  @lt4109  "bro just learned the concept of authoritarian capitalism" There is no such thing. Such a term is an oxymoron.
    2
  13.  @Humanresouces  "They pretty much had a market where they controlled everything, so it's essentially authoritarian capitalism." Wrong. That is not how market economy works. That is called a Command economy.
    2
  14.  @lt4109  : Wrong. Capitalism literally is based around voluntarism. Capitalism is completely opposed to any authoritarian control over the economy.
    2
  15.  @eisteebastard7565  : Nope. Cope harder.
    2
  16. "By no private property, we mean the means of production. There's possessions and then where's property. Property, in the economical sense is like a farm or a business or a factory. We don't believe those should be owned by a corporation, rather they should be owned and operated by the workers." So how exactly are you going to monitor that people aren't using their possessions wrong? You know, could still rent your "personal house" and become a landlord, or become an Uber using your "personal car". There are plenty of ordinary items and things that can also become the means of production... one good example is a cow; produces meat and milk which you can sell. The socialists in Cuba were smart, and claimed that cows are therefore State property.
    1
  17.  @Wondering_Ghoul  : What you believe is correct. As an AnCap, I acknowledge your position. Free people should be free to associate with whoever they want. If free people want to form a commune where wealth is shared equally, that's their prerogative. If free people want to trade and acquire capital, that's their prerogative. As long as no one is infringing upon the rights of others, they can be free to live however they want. That is indeed, anarchy.
    1
  18.  @jamielattin9182  : Maybe someone wants or needs another apartment, who knows. Or maybe the centralized entity cannot provide housing fast enough, after all, you cannot just demand that every worker has to build houses now, since people need to know what they are doing and not everyone knows how to build houses.
    1
  19. There is no such thing, and such a term is an oxymoron. What you have in the USA is called a mixed economy.
    1
  20.  @KDH-br6hy : China is still a socialist country.
    1
  21. "You could argue "Pinochetism" is basically authoritarian capitalism with some practices of fascism. " It was neoliberalism. Nothing to do with fascism which was a socialist ideology.
    1
  22. "went on a mass privatization of their economy." Wrong. There was no privatization of any kind in Nazi Germany. It was never a thing. On the contrary, they nationalized most if not all of the German industry and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung". "To put it quite clearly: we have an economic programme. Point No. 13 in that programme demands the nationalisation of all public companies, in other words socialisation, or what is known here as socialism. … the basic principle of my Party’s economic programme should be made perfectly clear and that is the principle of authority… the good of the community takes priority over that of the individual. But the State should retain control; every owner should feel himself to be an agent of the State; it is his duty not to misuse his possessions to the detriment of the State or the interests of his fellow countrymen. That is the overriding point. The Third Reich will always retain the right to control property owners. If you say that the bourgeoisie is tearing its hair over the question of private property, that does not affect me in the least. Does the bourgeoisie expect some consideration from me?… Today’s bourgeoisie is rotten to the core; it has no ideals any more; all it wants to do is earn money and so it does me what damage it can. The bourgeois press does me damage too and would like to consign me and my movement to the devil.“ — Adolf Hitler, Hitler's interview with Richard Breiting, 1931, published in Edouard Calic, ed.,
    1
  23. "Hitler made deals with the German elites allowing certain big privately owned companies to become monopolies or cartel conglomerates. " Those elites were part of the NSDAP itself, and their companies became government subsidiaries.
    1
  24. "The workers of course had no rights." They had no rights in the USSR either, however they certainly were better off in Germany.
    1
  25. ​ @S0me0ne353  "Naziism and fascism is authoritarian-right." Wrong. They were totalitarian far-left socialists. "Authoritarian right" would be Augusto Pinochet. People like you have no clue what you are talking about if you keep putting free economics (economic liberalism / liberalization) on the same side as authoritarian central planning and call it the same.
    1
  26. "Isn’t fascism just an offshoot of socialism?" Yes. Fascism was a totalitarian far-left, socialist ideology based on National Syndicalism.
    1
  27.  @lt4109  Privatization wasn't a thing.
    1
  28.  @aSPEDmf  "Their economic beliefs align with capitalism." Wrong. Their economic beliefs were based on socialism and they were strictly anti-capitalist. In fact, their economy was almost identical to the USSR under Stalin.
    1
  29.  @chocolateavian  "Please explain how someone who literally created one of the most strict social class structured society in history is a socialist, or even left wing" What exactly is the difference between a society full of aryans and a society full of proletarians? Anyways, you cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  30.  @chungushook  "just because they named themselves socialist, doesnt mean they actually are. " They were socialists which is why they named their party like that in the first place. It signified what they were advocating for; socialism on a national level.
    1
  31.  @chungushook  "the nazis murdered loads of socialists for their beliefs." So did both Lenin and Stalin. Your point being?
    1
  32.  @chungushook  " the nazis where about as right-wing as you can be." Wrong. They were far-left, totalitarian socialists. Nothing to do with right wing of any kind whatsoever.
    1
  33.  @chungushook  "nothing about their politics was socialist" Wrong. Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production. Nazis had the latter.
    1
  34.  @chungushook  "why? Because of the name? " Because of their economic system.
    1
  35.  @chungushook  "Do you also believe that the DPRK is democratic?" It is democratic to a degree, since they allow people to vote and hold elections in the first place.
    1
  36.  @bw50v14  : Nope.
    1
  37. No. Any kind of imitation from nazism is also a socialist ideology.
    1
  38.  @sluluy  "when have you ever heard a neonazi talk about socialism?" Maybe they don't talk about it since they have no clue what they are advocating for in the first place?
    1
  39. "not because they wanted a society even remotely socialist" Wrong. You cannot be an advocate for centralized planning and strong government controls without being a socialist. That's what made Hitler a socialist. He may have been to the right from the Bolsheviks, but he was still a socialist leftist as he believed in strong central government control. Hitler outright declared himself a socialist in Mein Kampf, just not the Marxist international or full Soviet type. He struggled with HOW to distinguish his socialism from the rest of the Marxist crowd.
    1
  40. "Personal property is your house and any other random stuff you have that couldn’t really be used to restart capitalism ... but rather no one owns anything that could be used to restart capitalism. " Except literally everything can be used to "restart" capitalism, hun... house especially, you know, ever heard of landlords? Hell, you only need to be a good looking woman and then you only need your own body.
    1
  41.  @handsfortoothpicks  "Communists literally want to destroy the state." In theory ... and in order to achieve Communism you would need to take over all the means of production (dictatorship of the proletariat) but who in their right mind would just give that power away? Nobody has. Anyways, Anarcho-Capitalism also wants to destroy the state.
    1
  42.  @handsfortoothpicks  "Besides, lib right is pro capitalist, which is un democratic." Democracy is a form of governance. Capitalism is an economic system. Apples and oranges.
    1
  43.  @cetxscum  "since it will always lead to a class of few rich fucks gaining power over everyone" Their "power" completely depends on what the consumers want to support. You cannot magically get rich unless you have something to offer, which people are willing to buy.
    1
  44.  @m.r4841  " Both are extreme right wing in every aspect." Wrong. Extreme right wing would be Anarcho-Capitalism. National Socialism was a form of socialism, the complete opposite.
    1
  45.  @handsfortoothpicks  "Nazis literally banned the Communist party and the Social democratic party. He also targeted trade unionists." And both Lenin and Stalin did the same. Your point being?
    1
  46. It's an oxymoron.
    1
  47.  @m.r4841  "Both are indeed extreme right wing" Wrong. Both were totalitarian far-left, socialist ideologies. Extreme right wing would be Anarcho-Capitalism.
    1
  48.  @eisteebastard7565  "The Nazis literally had a free market" Wrong. They had no markets of any kind. They had a centralized and planned economy almost identical to the USSR under Stalin.
    1
  49.  @Humanresouces  "Mustache dude really did not know what Socialism was." He certainly did. “I have learned a great deal from Marxism as I do not hesitate to admit… The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun. The whole of National Socialism is based on it… National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order.” — Adolf Hitler , Hitler Speaks (1940), p. 186
    1
  50.  @dylancantsleep3308  "they had privatised industry by definition it’s not socialism" Wrong. There was no privatization of any kind. It wasn't a thing. On the contrary, the Nazis issued quotas for industries and farms and later reorganized all industries into corporations run by members of the Nazi Party. They called this nationalization as "Gleichschaltung".
    1