Comments by "" (@Cloud_Seeker) on "TIKhistory"
channel.
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Where did you get that definition from? You seem to have changed the definition in some way even if it is pretty much correct. Here is what Encyclopedia Britannica and Oxford Dictionary say:
"Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
"a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country’s wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries"
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism?q=Socialism
When we talk about the public we are often talking about the government. But we only do so because the government is the representation of the people as a whole. What belongs to everyone belong to the government.
Just like what TIK said before. A community is a nation. A community is a society. A government is a community of people. When everything is owned or controlled by the government, it is owned and controlled by the community. That is also what Hitler implemented as he created a totalitarian regime.
You asked for where does his ideal sync up with the definition. I will show you that but first I must point out something.
"since your party program is the very anthesis of that commonly accredited to Socialism?"
- What is said here is WHAT IS COMMONLY ACCREDITED TO SOCIALISM. This does not say "but your party is the very anthesis to Socialism". If the Marxists and the communists have been allowed to set the standard for what "Socialism" means, you have inherently a tainted definition. This is why Socialism and Communism was basically synonyms before. For what isn't communism but socialism since it strive to do everything Socialism wants? Socialism was not invented by Karl Marx. It date back to Plato and the Book Utopia describe a Socialistic world. So why should someone else not be allowed to define what Socialism means outside of the Marxist or Communists political world view?
But here is where they sync.
"Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal."
- He make the claim that their German ancestors worked collectively for the common good, the good of everyone in the community.
"Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property."
- Here he makes an attack on Marxism which has defined a lot of the views on Socialism. Socialism was a concept that date back to Plato. While the Marxists view is that no one should even associated with the idea of private property. Hitler correctly points out that Socialism never actually require people from not even be associated with private property. No one is going to lay public claim to your tooth brush for example. I also need to point out that no ideology have ever tried to implement every single point. It should be impossible just like pure capitalism is impossible.
"Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality and, unlike Marxism, it is patriotic."
- A lot of communistic ideals attacked the very idea of personality. That someone might say "I am British" or "I am American". Communism at the time was international. It tried to unify the world (Workers of the world Unite) and so tried to erase the ideas of nations and national belonging. Where everyone belonged to a great collective. Where everything was ours. It is not meme for nothing you know. Artists that were depressed and felt lonely were attacked because "how can you feel lonely when you belong to a collective of millions?", the only reason is if you didn't belong to the collective. Hitler wanted a socialism that focused on the nation, the German community and not the international community.
"We are not internationalists. Our Socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the State on the basis of race solidarity. To us, State and race are one…"
- This is just spelling it out in the clear. He was a nationalist and not a internationalist. You might see this as a nation within the EU wanting to protect their nation from outside EU interference. Or how a state in the US wants to prevent federal overreach. He was focused on the community, the community that belonged to the territory called Germany. He also see the community as a racially homogenize community. Treat race like a social class. Just like the Socialists do not want the wealthy and the rich because they exploit the common workers, Hitler did not want some races because he thought they are the rich and wealthy that exploit the common workers.
3
-
3